22/02/2016 House of Commons

Hello and welcome to BBC Parliament live coverage of the House of

Commons. At half past three David Cameron will make a statement to MPs

on the deal reached with European Union leaders on reforming the terms

of the UK's membership of the EU. That agreement pave the way for the

out referendum on the 23rd of June. Mr Cameron announced the date on

Saturday when he returned from Brussels. The Prime Minister will

make the case for the EU UK to Burbank. Such is the justice

secretary and the work and pensions Secretary. The Prime Minister

statement on the EU will be repeated and debated in the House of Lords as

well. Member to join me for a round-up of the days debate about

the EU in both houses of parliament at 11 o'clock this evening. We start

this question to the home Secretary May.

Order! Order! Questions to the Secretary of State for the Home

Department. Question one Mr Speaker. Thank you, the investigator and

Powers bill has been in close consultation with the industry. The

cost of the public for implement the provisions will continue to be

refined as we hope more detailed vote come. They can meet the costs

themselves. Full cost recovery will reply to operational cost including

those associated with new obligations under the bill. Thank

you Mr Speaker, the science and technology committee warned that the

bill of risk undermining the start we performing tech sector. Will the

Secretary of State and sure as that the UK businesses will not be placed

at a commercial disadvantage to overseas competitors? I can assure

the gentleman that. As I said and my answer to his initial question, we

will be ensuring that the full cost recovery replies to operational cost

for any companies who have, except for notices issued to them. What is

clear is that that is what we have done as the government in the past,

that is the privileged governments have done and we will continue its.

Was the home secretary look carefully at the recommendations of

the joint committee in regards to but recognition of the Internet. We

were clear that greater clarity is needed on deafness in order to be

able to allow the private sector to fully cost there for proposals. I

think the right honourable gentleman, those honourable members

and any other place to set on that committee and who did an excellent

job in producing their reports, a very well thought through and

careful report. We will look very carefully at the issue. We are

looking awfully on all committees. We will bring forward a revised bill

proposals in due course. On the specific issue of private

businesses, could be home secretary outlines what recent discussions she

or her ministers have had with the devolved ministrations about that

particular aspect? Discussions with devolved ministrations have been

going on throughout the preparation of the initial draft bill, and

indeed have continued and will continue. Also, but will also

continue its discussions between ministers and officials and the

companies and private room at private businesses themselves.

Question number two Mr Speaker. With the mission was a speaker I will

answer questions two and ten on the order paper together. The minimum

income threshold of ?18,600 for sponsoring a partner under the

family immigration roles, and so is that couples wishing to establish

the family life in the UK do not place burdens on the taxpayer and

hub motor integration. It is being considered by the courts and upheld

by the court of appeals. The Low the welfare of immigrants has said that

these rules discriminately affecting women. 25% get less than 18,600

compared to 75% of men. This gives young people it is evident as well.

What actual the home Secretary take to reduce these on sale rules? I

would say that the threshold was set as advice of the migration advisory

committee to look very carefully on the levels of income and terms of

not being a bargain on the taxpayer. The gross median and Scotland in

2014 racks at 21,725 higher than the threshold. This of legal challenge

has been raised by the course of Appeal. The threshold was upheld.

Thinking you Mr Speaker, the Secretary of State will see a story

reported by the BBC this morning where she fled the area and gave

birth to her son in the UK. Her husband a Syrian national is unable

to join the meeting because they cannot afford the fees of these. Can

Secretary of State tell us with his British nationals should go to enter

her family life. Her husband home country of Syria? There are various

different routes that could be available. We have the family

reunion and route that can apply and circumstances. I'm not familiar with

all the us is that he highlights. Equally, the government is in

respect for uncertainties for the protection of the children. This is

considered by the court and upheld. That gave the point made so

eloquently by my Honorable friend about not being a burden on the

taxpayer. To what extent do we take into account, charges made by other

countries, two British nationals hoping to emigrate to those

countries? I say, my honourable friend makes a point on different

immigration systems and different parts of the world. Obviously we

have taken advice on the migration advisory committee looking at cost

and look at those pardons to see that someone does not place a burden

on the UK taxpayer. But his odyssey for other countries to assess what

is appropriate and their own system. The financial threshold family visas

is causing particular distress to one of my constituents who cannot

work the hours required because she is a carer for her vulnerable child.

This means she is living without her husband and the Taliban without his

father. Does the Minister acknowledged that he is at risk of

creating a generation of children whose only contact with one of their

parents will be via Skype? Now, I don't except the point the Honorable

Lady makes. These issues of the welfare of the child are absolutely

part of the consideration that the takes, this was a matter that was

considered by the courts of the pale. And firmly upheld. I would say

to the Honorable lady that when this issue of the -- all being said in

November 2011, the migration advisory committee gave a lower

threshold of 18,600 but equally advise the national could have been

set at 25,000 700. The Government reflected in those circumstances and

set it to level as it has done. That little has been upheld by the court.

The Minister has mentioned the court of appeal but the matter is not

entirely set from a legal point of view because this week the Supreme

Court will hold the cases of two but is nationals who cannot meet these

tough financial rules to allow their not EU spouses to come and live with

them. The Honorable member for Hampstead and Coburn has mentioned

that according to the children's Commissioner for England there are

15,000 British children growing up via Skype. How can the Minister

justified the stress and anxiety caused by these children -- to these

children for the other flexible and unjust rule. I don't accept the

characterisation that the honourable lady has proven to. I does recognise

the number that she has proffered. I do say, that it is about good

immigration, it is in relation to language in terms of mapping a

bargain to the taxpayer but equally promoting integration. We believe

the policy is ineffective in doing that. ... Last year the conservative

call on the government to change these rules. Melting, the

significant contribution made by millions of Brooke Britons living

as the Minister of Rome as the opposition, will he at least listen

to his own party and get rid of these rules was to scrimmage against

hard-working families? I say again to the honourable lady that we do

not believe that the rules are discriminatory, and the way that she

is a just and characterises, the system is in place to ensure a good

integration and is absurd that people are not a burden on the

taxpayer. I thought that was something she would recognise as

being a positive aspect of the policy to make sure that people can

contribute and settle. The rules have been set, and upheld by the

court and look at the two of underline those key things. With

permission I will answer questions three and 16 on the order paper

together. Border force carries out 100% of the tax. They deliver an

effective and intelligent responses for a range of security threats.

They used equipment and a range of search techniques. I think the home

secretary for that answer but last of the birth of eminent fives were

found in a container in my constituency, that came just three

weeks after 20 immigrants were found of wear. Given that my local border

forces are facing cuts, how can the secretary reassure me that these

cuts are not damaging the safety and security? The approach that we are

taking to these matters comes across in a number of ways. First of all,

in relation to water forth, we are looking to edge does this

technology, but also to an Benedike Howedes make sure they can operate

successfully. It will be a much more intelligent lead approach. We can

target what they need to be in accordance with the intelligence,

and also this government has enhanced our ability to deal with

organised crime. This is an issue that the national crime agency set

up by the last Coalition government is taking very seriously and is

acting on. Thank you, I have ten electronic passports case and my

efficiency at the airport of my department is unable to tell me how

many people travelled through. And how often they malfunction and how

many were Texans they are. Does the home Secretary agree with me that

the warning -- as identified by the office, this is one of them and it

should be looked into? What I say is that I think that the increased

number of each day for checking passports that we have is a good

move. It's and hat security at our border. Thank you Mr Speaker, I have

been trying to figure out how many people arrive at UK airports without

valid travel documents. I'm very surprised that nobody seems to be

able to give me an answer to this. Within minutes be able to give me an

answer and if not hesitate to ask them to find out this important

matter? I can tell my honourable friend that 18,000 individuals were

refused at entry at the border in 2014 equity those who were

travelling on an valid documentation. When somebody comes

the UK border they are subjected to a range of tax we have offices at

the border who trained and are able to detect forged documents and steps

are being taken to intercept those individuals who don't have the

correct documents of of a bit over at the border. And I congratulate

the home Secretary are the words as he sat on the value of EU membership

in terms of protecting the safety and security of this country. Can I

ask her, even though that is the case and I agree with her could we

have more specific focus on the quieter port, the quieter airports

were the smuggling gangs know it is quieter? I indicated in my response

earlier to one of his honourable friend, that the way border forces

of prejudice as in a much intelligent lead basis, so that they

can be flexible in relation to the staff that employed in different

ports, professing recognising, that we don't eat as a focus on one or 24

22 focus on a range of ports. -- focus on one or two ports. We need

to rely on strong EU coordinated approach to security including at

our borders and our ports. The Secretary of State and I know road

that we rely on EU criminal justice and security measures. And those

circumstances, I assume that the home office carried out a risk

assessment on the impact of UK withdraw and the EU on security at

ports. Recommended of the public who have not yet decided how to vote in

the referendum access the conclusions? I have dissected say to

the honourable gentleman, I'm not sure that his parliamentary language

for me to repeat Mr Speaker. He can rest assured that argument there

relations of these matters will be fully set out for people over the

coming months. One of the arguments I put, he will have no because he

was involved in this and a different capacity before he came into this

chamber. It was around issues like the operation of various sizes and

home affairs meshes is what we set out very clearly as the government

by without the benefit was in being part of those measures. Tony Smith

the interim head of the UK border for from 20 1213 said that a vote to

leave the EU would pose a lot of issues for the border force who is

already under huge pressure. In particular he highlighted the fact

that the border for staff would have to carry out more attacks on EU

citizens. Can the Secretary of State confirm that the border for school

and the fact to face more cuts year on year for the foreseeable future?

I'm happy to say that anybody who comes to the UK border, anybody

receives a stringent checks at the UK border, we are doing that now on

a much more intelligent lead basis, in terms of looking at individuals

who may be of concern, and yes he is right that we have interactions with

other member states and the European Union to the use of things like a

system to identify people who are of concern who are coming across the

border. Border forth and other operations are not about people, the

about goods and bridges are good and illegal goods being brought into the

UK. That is where the intelligence led approach can be helpful in

identifying when the areas of concern and action being taken

appropriate of properly. But commission on what action questions

four and 14 on the order paper. Crime commissioners, sorry for and

13. Crime commissioners are providing a comfortable position and

making a real difference to policing locally. There has been a reduction

in crime and more than a quarter sensor and seduction. -- production.

There is already good process of scrutiny that is available through

the piece and crime panels, for looking at any potential crime that

police may have. That process it is enshrined and is being taken. What I

do is when any area is looking at the potential for roles, for such as

we have in the greater Manchester area in relation to peace and crime

commissioner with the productive mayor of that area. There is full

consideration of all the aspects of the issue to ensure that going ahead

they can give it to do so properly without conflict of interest as

ensuring that the best services delivered. Thank you Mr Speaker, my

local police force received a positive inspection report from the

home inspector. With my right honourable friend join me and please

do the work of the constable at the conservative police and crime

commissioner and their efforts to fight crime and specifically the

chief constables national work on the prevent programme. I'm very

happy to exit and congratulations I'm sure everybody across his house

to the excellent work that is being done by the chief constable and the

peace and crime commissioner. They have done an job and the crime

commissioner will be stepping down. But I would like to thank them for

the work that he has done over his first term at peace and crime

commissioner. The main problem that the South Yorkshire police and crime

commissioner faces is the shortfall in his budget was Roosevelt and too

much 250 police jobs being lost. It makes rational planning difficult.

With the home Secretary agreed that the PCs can do the job better if

they had the budget set at the remainder of the Parliament of what

will they do about it? The pitcher he has had out is not the one that I

recognise. We have protected, police budgets, across the period of the

Comprehensive Spending Review. I would have thought that he would

have welcome that given that his front this one of the cut by 10%. A

recent reports by the British retail consultant found that these crimes

have gone up by 25%. What action was the home Secretary take to and a

vote for commissioners to take act against any level of violence

against retail staff. What action can be take to reduce this? First of

all, I think we are all concerned about Violet Maxine taken place. It

is a matter of real concern. The operational response to such crimes

being committed and the business of such crimes as a matter for the

chief Constable of the particular for the area to look into. I know

there are a number of retail chain to ever working very closely. To try

to ensure that they are able to provide added support and security

for the staff. Although I have had my differences that time with the

pleasing crime commissioner and the concert, when my right honourable

friend agree with me that his record along with the biggest Achilles, and

reducing crime is exemplary and is an example to all? I would again

congratulate and walk him see what that is being done in the concert

and relation to the reduction of crime by the chief Constable and the

pleasing crime commissioner. It is not the only area where we have been

able to see crime solving but I think that the following McNish or

has been significant. -- Lancashire. Can I ask if she has any statement

from the North have a sure crime commissioner from his panel? It is

expected that the full transfer funding from the urban areas to more

rural areas and that the city will benefit. As developing government

policy or is it just letting the cat of the bag? I would have tossed the

ombudsman would be aware, we have Derek Lilley said that the proposed

changes that we were... We're trying to develop a formula that is

affected of the needs. I also sent to the ombudsman he looks across the

at police forces across the area he will see that the funding formula

needs to change. Question five Mr Speaker. Mr Mike Penning, we ask

permission to answer questions on the order paper. Pleasing crime

commissioners will have a duty to collaborate on the Bill before this

house becomes a law. Hampshire fire service and handsets of the services

share a building resulting and financial sufficiency. Will he

congratulated me and taking a lead and collaborative working. I was

there recently and saw for myself deeply working is being done between

the emergency services. The collaboration with the chief and the

chief Constable as of the PCC to, they are doing excellent work. The

map of my Honorable friend agree that it is important that the new

generation of pleasing crime commissioners who have been elected,

or will be elected in a couple months' time get behind this

important reform. Will he join me in welcoming the commitment of the

excellent PCC candidates and his strong desire to implement these

subtler forms? We need to make sure that we spending taxpayer money

efficiently and well and collaboration and that is the best

way for that. She is really a shy or tiring so. The fire and rescue

services collaborating very well all over the country, particularly with

the ambulance trusts. Will you tell us why he sees necessary under the

new bill, that the police and crime commissioners would actually take

control of the fire services, surely the two organizations are so

different in so many ways. You can have the collaboration without the

PCC running our fire services. I think is of the matter, someone who

is duly able to run that like a PCC should be on any committee. I'm sure

we would want an efficient emergency service, before I service working

closely with the police is the way we would like to do that.

Collaboration with the services will be the communication network. How

much will they cause, and though one day be in place? -- and when will

they be in place. There are bits out there and the moment, it will be

confidential at the moment. What we do know is that the air racism that

we have had needs replacing, it is very expensive and this will be

cheaper. The pleasing crime commissioner will put forward a

business case to take over the governments of Hampshire for fire

rescue services. My honourable friend pointed out what they already

doing, we already have a trading arm which pays for the governments of

the fire and rescue Authority. What this is the police and fire

commission approved for that would allow him to run the service? If the

local community wants to have a more efficient service which could be the

case, and accept that they are particularly good. When I was in

Hampshire there were people asking me for more collaboration, more work

to be done to particularly from the front lines which is the most

important the plaintiff. Given the cuts and funding to the police

service, and the fire and rescue services already budgeted for by

this government, can the Minister guarantee that placing fire and left

the services under PCC control will not lead to further cut in the

numbers of front line firefighters? This is bigger, thank goodness the

chances of not listen to labor front bench to relive the funding for the

please worked until 2020 because office they of a 10% cut. What we

must make sure, what we must make sure is that we have an efficient

service and that will be going for. Thank you Mr Speaker. Tackling crime

is a priority for government. Show that knife crime is 14% lower than

it was in June 2010, we recognise that there is more to do and new

actions to tackle knife crime will be set out in the modern crime

prevention strategy. I think my honourable friend for the first bite

the. -- knife what action is her department taken to Brook -- tackle

knife crime. Can I think my honourable friend for his question,

and congratulate him on the new arrival, new baby who I believe was

very involved in the delivery. I am also aware of the concerns about

knife crimes and Essex, and I recently met with my right

honourable friend and I have been more than happy to meet with him to

discuss precisely this issue. The taking if they just steps, and early

this month be supported 30 police forces, including Essex. They

undertook coordinated action against knife crime. Thank you Mr Speaker.

Knife crime, bike other crime is best dealt with preemptively. In

Sussex crime has gone up 8%, and yet today the government inspector said

that routinely front-line, neighbourhood, and local police and

being taken away. Kenny Minister please be looked at the thousand

front-line police officers and staff that are being taken away and for

the impact neighbourhood policing? Mr Speaker, can I start when it's a

-- comes to Sussex. Congratulating the police commissioner. At that

hair, and we discussed to take she's I think he should remember the boat

that he made in this house to cut police resources by 10%, something

that decided the House disagreed with. Thank you Mr Speaker. Recently

and Darby a young man lost his life. Lester, knife years rose across the

UK. Can I ask my right honourable friend what steps the department are

taking to tackle the scourge of individuals from carrying knives? My

honourable friend is right. We do need to educate and show them people

that caring matters is not school, it's not something that they should

be doing. It's a big that they should understand is dangerous and

can result in loss of life. That is why in the last parliament we

legislated so that if someone is caught with a knife twice they have

a mandatory prison sentence, and we are doing more work. I would be more

than happy to work with her and discuss the specific issues and

Darby which I do know have... Have the Minister considered amnesty to

invite people to hand in weapons, whether it be knives or other

weapons, it was very successful in the West Midlands. Mr Speaker, that

is a matter for chief constables to determine. I said that we worked

with 13 forces including within that work, world knife amnesties.

Question number seven. Discussions with

to ensure that the public are aware and protected from fraud. It is the

mission to counter the wicked work of fraudsters. While I actually

understand the difficulties and effectively policing the Internet,

financial scams judging by my own parliamentary accounts, seem to be

out of control. The most older people are being targeted. When my

right honourable friend have another look at this issues and see if there

is a way that we can bring these criminals to account? It's because

we have taken a fresh look at this. Just as my honourable friend

recommends that we have launched the joint task force, we are continuing

to support the supply of the streetwise campaign which makes

people more aware and guarded about fraud, but we have invested 90

million, and one point billion and two security over the next years. We

take this seriously. In the cyber age, I am a cyber minister up to the

minute, up to the mark, and up to the job. LAUGHTER We would expect no

less of the right honourable gentleman. Can I ask the cyber

minister, as it seems to be -- since he is up to the mark, about the

activities of a website which was discovered recently

selling the stolen bank details of 100,000 British citizens? Since he

is an up to the minute cyber minister, how is it possible for

this website to carry on for six months before it was closed down?

How much of the 1.9 billion that he is targeting on cyber crime will be

used to proactively close downsides of this kind? The honourable

gentleman knows because his committee has drawn attention to did

in the past, that it is critically important that the government works

with all other agencies including banks and private sector

organizations, any task force has permission to do that. It is summed

up by this. They have publicly signed up to commit their full

support to work in partnership to protect the public from being

victims of fraud, scams, and maximise opportunities to prevent

fraudster from operating in the way that he recommended. Mr Speaker, the

cyber minister will know that you are more likely to be marked online

than in the street. -- mocked. Will the home secretary confirmed that

after fighters of her government saying cut crime,. The tooth will be

told that far from falling, crying is changing. Our country now faces

crime doubling when this government continues to cut the number of

police officer. The honourable gentleman will be disappointed to

know that I am going to say that he is right. I remind him that we are

the government that made the decision to publish the statistics,

and to designate cyber crime and the way that we have. Until we

appreciate the scale of the problem we won't develop the solutions

necessary to deal with that. I would also say to him, as he will know,

that we are using some of that extra resources to set up the national

cyber centre to co-ordinate work in this area. Thank you Mr Speaker. The

government has provided funding. It is interesting work that is going

forward. Naturally, we will help encourage PC sees in the country to

reduce crime, support victims, and closely engorged Democrats engage.

The American comedian Eddie Cantor said that those currently on the

most wanted list have been the most wanted as children, they would no

longer be on the most wanted list. In that context, with the Minister

welcomed the work that his department is doing with the early

intervention foundation in creating police leaders academies on early

intervention. Will he ensure that funding is available so that every

police Commissioner a elected this year can attend courses this year.

Can I praise the work of the early intervention foundation and the work

that they're doing is important. Other agencies do important work,

but we know about if we can catch them young to me compared to them

from becoming criminals. Following the government's troubled families

programme, it can be any doubt that early intervention works. It

produces petty crime, encourages school attendance, gets people into

jobs. What became clear and why this is welcome with the Minister is

saying, without the active participation of the police, those

programmes are so ineffectual. I hope that we will ensure that every

chief constable in Commissioner will regard this in hype a wordy. I am

sure that everyone has heard with my right honourable friend has said.

That is why we put the money into the foundation, that is why we are

doing the review at the moment into the police early intervention

academy so that we can prove -- improve the outcomes. Humberside

police is 500 fewer officers than five years ago, and of course across

North Lincolnshire... Isn't it the case that the reality for the police

on the ground is that early intervention is not a priority and

it is being pushed onto ill resourced local authorities. Mr

Speaker, I am sure that... Every single time we hear from the Labour

Party they want more money and yet their front bench want to cut the

funding to the police force. That is what the reality is, not what is

actually going on. Number 11 Mr Speaker. Bear with me Mr Speaker. Mr

Speaker, as I wrote earlier there are four police forces currently

using track my crime. There are more coming on force, and 22 forces will

have it available to them. I think the Minister for that answer. How

successful has tracked my crime bend and supporting victims of crime and

keeping them up to date and supporting them in the process of

these matters being back investigated? When I broke this

earlier, the tooth -- wrote. Victims have the confidence to

actually believe in their justice system. Track my Crime will help

that. The evidence gathering stage of the review has been done.

18,000 police officers have been cut in the last five years. Is it really

sensible to waste scarce police resources and enforcing a ban on

poppers and criminalizing users other relatively harmless substance.

I hope that the honourable gentleman will welcome the psychoactive

substances act, because that blanket ban on the effect of these

substances that we do not know what they do to young people and that

they caused deaths is incredibly important. When it comes to poppers

we have a commitment to reviewing the benefits of poppers against the

harms to see whether they should be included. Question number 14 Mr

Speaker. Thank you Mr Speaker. The modern slavery act, it is too early

to make it effective -- make effectiveness of this act. Some

businesses are already published a statement setting out what steps

they've taken to prevent moderates lately in they're gloating surprise

James. Am grateful for that reply. He writes that the role that the

private sector can play in the fight against slavery should not be

underestimated. What assessment has she made so far of the effectiveness

of the transparency and supply chain's provision in the act for

companies of turnovers with ?36 million or more. He is right. It is

not about law enforcement and government taking action, it is

about working with the private sector and with businesses. I am

pleased that although the first set of declarations and relation to

supply chains is only from the 31st of March, we have seen a number of

companies going forward and making this declaration. I will in a month

or so hold an event with companies to share good practice so that we

can make sure that we are getting the best event, ending consumers can

make their decision. Despite some of the good measures in the act, the

fact is that child trafficking is still taking place across the

European Union. It is taken within the scandal that is the migration

crisis. What work is the home Secretary doing with her colleagues

across the European Union to make sure that this issue is adequately

tackled across all 28 Member States? First of all, I am encouraging other

member state to take the steps that we are taking in terms of

interesting new legislation adjective at the modern slavery act.

Secondly, we are working with organised immigration crime --

immigration crime. Quack I think that this is of enormous

benefit because he is an expert in this area. Further to the question,

could my right honourable friend set out in more detail the importance of

the transparency and supply chains in the modern slavery act, and

perhaps how it will be monitored in the future? Not to too much detail,

given the time. I think that it has to import and fax. It makes

companies think about the issues of the supply chains and whether there

is slavery. Secondly, there are declarations as to what or no action

they have taken, will be available to consumers, and they can make sure

-- make choices. We are looking at a number of options for ensuring that

that information is publicly available in one place. May I make

the right honourable lady aware about doing excellent work in my

constituency. I am shocked to hear the extent of modern slavery in this

country. Does she think that people are sufficiently aware and what can

she do to highlight that? Can I say to the honourable gentlemen we are

are aware of the work of this organisation does. He is right. Most

people in this country are shocked to know that shaped An slavery takes

place, and would be more shocked to see the degree and extent of it. It

is up to everyone in this house to make sure that everyone knows that

they do. The government is and challenge Daesh's mitigation. I

think the Minister for that response. Daesh is committing

atrocities against others who do not agree with them with their way of

life. What is the government doing to communicate those viscosities

across the UK to prevent the spread of extreme it -- extremism across

the UK. We have to challenge those extreme opinions. The UK's

government highlights hyperbole is of Daesh. We work with those that I

described a minute ago, 130 based community projects were delivered in

2015, reaching 20 5000 people. That's 20 5000. I am glad that in

this most solemn of matter and the honourable gentleman has been able

to provide us with the political florist. Question number one served.

Last week I was in Washington I think ministerial. A set that is

really. 2014, Daesh directed, inspired, or enabled attacks in

other countries worldwide. In 2015 there are almost 60 attacks, as well

as well is to budget the tax tear it up by Daesh branches, including

those in Libya and Egypt. This is a fight that cannot be won by five --

fighting in isolation. We should be more open and sharing intelligence,

and our expertise. We must organise our own efforts effectively to

support vulnerable state and improve their ability to respond to the

threat from terrorism. We made commitments to strengthen

information sharing, enhanced efforts and discourage social media.

This is the child's of our generation, and one that we will win

by working together. Thank you Mr Speaker. I think my right honourable

friend for her answer. But she acted with me that the creation of this

was the step in the right direction, and this will change radically the

future and take on more responsibilities? I agree with my

honourable friend. It was important to create that directly elected

individual, accountable to the public a little cruising. The call

from police and crime commission is because you want to see that role of

all. My right honourable friend are already in discussions about how

this will might revolve and as to the criminal justice system stop

can recommend the home Secretary on her announcement this began, and on

her decision to put the national interest before self-interest.

Unlike others. When she began at some secretary she took a

Eurosceptic stance, opting out of dozens of EU measures. She has since

opted back into many, most recently on the sharing of fingerprinting and

DNA. Is it fair to say that the realities of office has shown her

the value of EU cooperation in tackling crime and terrorism, and

changed her mind on print's membership of the EU? I have always

been very clear about the value of cooperation when it is in the

British national interest. That is what of the 35 measures that we have

decided to propose it this house should opt back into, and relation

to critical 36, it was precisely because we believed it was of a

national interest. I think I will take that as a yes Mr Speaker.

Yesterday the Prime Minister was explicitly clear that our membership

in the EU helps Britain fight terrorism. But, within minutes he

was directly contradicted by one of his own cabinet members who claims

that the each -- UK's EU membership made a terrorist attack are likely.

Coming from an array senior members of the Cabinet, it is downright

irresponsible. Will the home Secretary take this opportunity to

reaffirm Government policy on this crucial issue and condemn this

baseless scaremongering. Hear, hear! The government's issue is clear. I

am clear that there are more areas in which cooperation with other

Member States in the European Union is in our benefit in terms of the

national security of this country and dealing with criminal matters.

As I indicated earlier, and response to questions, we do take security at

our borders seriously and that is why we have the checks that we do.

The government has agreed to work when -- work and create new

initiatives. Can the Minister confirm in the initiative will begin

and which organizations the government will work with to help

identify those children? Can I thank my honourable friend for her

question. We are working with the NHC are in relation to development

of a new initiative. Discussions are ongoing with the, we have had round

table discussions. You will come back when our consideration has

concluded. Thank you Mr Speaker. Following on in the vein of

trafficking, I would like to ask the question of a constituent of I Blake

cannot name because of her vulnerability. She was human traffic

from Nigeria to the UK, held in domestic slavery in London, and

escaped over ten years ago to my constituency. She now has a family

and a husband. Her children were born in Scotland, but you cannot get

help. Her the home office has not been helpful. Can the Minister meet

with me and see what can be done to help his family settled in Scotland?

Can I say to the honourable lady that she raises what appeared to be

a serious individual case. If I may, Mr Speaker, if I can speak to the

honourable lady after the station and obtained some more details we

will respond. Thank you Mr Speaker. I met with a number of police

officers and my constituency who have witnessed extreme trauma. The

arrangements for their sick pay and their medical discharge and pension

seem to be strikingly different to that of those who have suffered

physical injury in the courts of their duty. Does my right honourable

friend agree with the Vatican and the government's pursuit of parity

between mental and physical illness, police forces should be ensuring

that all injury or illness that is attributable to service is supported

in the same way. I agree with my right honourable friend. Police

officers are entitled to exactly the same sick leave and pay arrangements

suffer a mental or a physical on this. Request is subject to same

task, and is is possibility of chief constables that they provide for

that in their local policies. I am also pleased to say that in October

2014, the government allocated ?8 million to the blue light services

programme to support the mental and physical well-being of emergency

services personnel. The government have always justified their cuts to

policing on the basis that crime has not gone up. Since 2010, we have

lost more officers than any other force. Crime in Manchester is going

up and going up faster than other metropolitan areas. As crime

continues to rise, with the government reasonably be considered

the production to the number of front line police officers? Lets go

of this again. We as a government have not produced a number of police

officers on the front line. And front line times, the percentage

have gone up. One party that wanted to cut the police budget was the

Labour Party. That was a people we do not to. Thank you Mr Speaker.

What steps the secretary of state taking to see what we are doing to

better protect the public. We are taking a number of steps as a piece

of work that is being undertaken to ensure that we look at where

capabilities should best light in terms of police reform. I just

others this year and relation to this matter. I am happy to say that

I have been able to have discussion on precisely this matter with an

honourable friend who if he becomes mayor of London will continue this.

The chief Rob Wainwright has ordered up to 5000 ices fighters in the EU.

How does the home Secretary Phil that being in the EU makes us safer?

The honourable gentleman will be aware that what is important for the

United Kingdom and being in the European Union is that we are able

to continue with the border controls that we have. Unlike those country

and sang and, we will never be an changing, and read will maintain our

security checks. Hear, hear! Mr Speaker! The Prime Minister has

claimed that he has delivered on his promise that if an EU job seeker has

not found work within six months they will be required to leave. A

promise that he made to JCB workers on the 20th of November 20 14. In

reply to my worker -- a written question, number 17574 in December

of last year, the integration committee admitted that Aidan EU

migrants and keep the status of the job seeker for longer than six

months. Can the home secretary clarified who is right? The Prime

Minister or the immigration minister? I think that we can safely

say that the Prime Minister is right. In a few moments time he will

be able to hew precisely how the Prime Minister has set up out. Mr

Speaker, I was proud to be able to joint housing for women last week to

celebrate the first anniversary of their operating the women's refuge.

They support 38 women and children and 2015. Unfortunately, not all

refugees are in the same position. 30 have closed over the last year.

42% of crisis and is not having money beyond next month. Can the

home Secretary do everything she can to ensure that no woman is forced to

return home to a violent partner and possibly her death? The honourable

lady, I remember the days when she and I both served on the Council for

the London Borough of Merton. She continues to take in this issue

domestic violence and support for the victims and survivors of

domestic violence. Of course, the government has put extra money into

refugees. We have been able to do that and we have also been ensuring

that we support money for various domestic violence services. This is

a terrible time -- crime and we need to deal with that. What assessment

has been made about a number of connections made by police forces

for child abuse images date is basis to be launched? My honourable friend

raise and important issues. Child abuse image database. Something that

this government into dues and is leading the world in terms of

tackling indecent images of children online. We now have all 43 forces

connected to the image database. We are starting to see real results in

protecting children. Where police, fire and rescue services,. Will the

Minister did a guarantee that whatever happened that there that --

that they would allow the services provided to be privatised? The whole

reason for enabling police and crime commission is to bring together

policing and fire and rescue services is to be able to offer

enhanced services. In looking at a decision to be on a local level, a

business it -- case will Mr Speaker, the commission I would

like to make a statement on the agreements reached in Brussels last

week. First let me say a word about the migration crisis which was also

discussed at the European Council. We agreed that we needed to press

ahead with strengthening the use borders to ensure that not the

charges are returned promptly and back the new mission that has

brought the criminal gangs to put them in peoples slides and the risk.

Britain. But the Constitution and all of these areas. Turning to

Britain's place in Europe. I have spent the last nine months ending

out the four areas are ready for form and beating with all other 27

EU heads of state and government to reach an agreed with that delivers

concrete reforms and all four areas. Let me take each in turn. First, but

as jobs and businesses depend on being able to trade with Europe on a

level praying field. The one new protection for our economy to

safeguard the proud and promote our financial services industry to

protect British taxpayers from because the problems in the euro

zone and to ensure that we have a full say over the rules of a single

market while remaining outside the euro zone. We got all those things.

We have not is probably the fact of the towns and our right to keep it

but we have ensured that we cannot discriminate against. Responsibility

for supervising the financial stability of the UK, will always

remain in the hands of the Bank of England. We

have not be made to bail out countries in the euro zone, they

made sure that the euro zone cannot act as a block to undermine the

integrity of these free-trade single market. We guarantee that produced

this is one of faith and he does commission for being outside the

euro zone. For example, our financial service firms, our number

one service export, employing over a million people can ever be forced to

relocate inside the euro zone if they want to undertake complex

trades and Europe, just because they're based in the UK. These with

taxes and not to set out in a legally binding agreements, off 28

member states will also clear that these reviews will be changed, to

incorporate the protections of the UK as the economy that is inside the

EU, but outside the euro zone. We also agree that a to enable 9 euros

on countries to raise issues of concern, and we won the battle to

ensure that this could be triggered by one country alone. Of course the

distance would be available if he were to leave the EU. We wanted

commitments to make Europe more competitive, creating jobs, and

making British families more financially secure. Again, we got

them. Europe will complete the single market and key areas that

will help Britain. And services making it easier for thousands of UK

service bays companies like IT firms to trade in Europe. In the capital

so UK startups can access more for their business and an energy. We

have secured commitments to complete trade and investment agreements with

the fastest-growing and most dynamic economies around the world.

Including the USA, Japan, China as well as our Commonwealth allies,

India, New Zealand and Australia. These deals could add billions of

pounds and thousands of jobs. Of course, they build on the deals we

already have with the three countries around the world for which

Britain has been accredited to the negotiating muscle that comes from

being part of the world largest trading bloc. This is bigger, of

course country after country has said that they could find trade

deals with Britain, but they have also said that their priority would

be trade deals with the EU. By their nature, these EU deals would be

bigger and better, a deal with Britain would not even be possible

until we have settled our position outside of the EU. This is bigger,

for those members who care about finding new trade deals outside of

the EU, we would be looking at years and years of delay.

Last but by no means least on competitiveness, one of the biggest

frustrations for Britain's business is red tape and bureaucracy. There

will be partners to cut the total burden of EU regulation on business.

This build on the progress that we have already made, with the

commission already cutting the number of initiatives by 80%. In the

that the cost of EU red tape will be going down, not up. Of course if we

were to leave the EU, but ultimately achieve a deal, with access to the

single market like Norway. Who would be subject to all of the EU

regulation when selling in the euro. But with no say over the world. As

the former Europe spokesman for the no reason conservative party, if you

want to run Europe you must be an euro. If you want to be run by

Europe, feel free to join nor Ray. Third, we want to reduce the very

high level of migration within the unique -- EQ by preventing our role

for system to act as a magnet for people to come to our country. After

the hard work of the home Secretary we have secured new powers against

criminals of the country and power to stop them from coming here in the

first is empowered to do for them if they already here. We agreed a

longer reentry bands for fraudsters and people who collude and then into

the ridiculous situation for EU nationals can avoid British

immigration rules when bringing their feminism outside the EU.

Disagreement broke new ground with the European Council agreed to

reverse positions from the European Court of Justice. We also secured a

breakthrough agreement for Britain to reduce the unnatural drawl that I

benefit system exerts across Europe. Therefore he made sure that EU

migrants cannot claim the new employment benefit or universal

credit. Those coming that have not found work within six months cannot

be required to leave. At this counsel we agree that EU migrants

working in Britain can be prevented from sending Child benefit home at

UK rates. This would apply first some new claimants and then to

existing claimants on the start of 2020. We also establish a new break

so that EU migrants would have to wait for years until they have full

access to our benefit. Mr Speaker, people for the it was impossible to

achieve real change in our area. Yet, that is what we have done, we

have got the benefit. What is activated, once activated, the

emergency brake will be in place for seven years. If it began to lecture

it will still be operating in 2024. There will be people who won't be

getting 40 benefits until 2028. Bass full benefits. People should not be

able to come there and get access to our benefit to them straightaway. No

were something for nothing. I'm sure the discussion about welfare and

immigration, will be intense, let me make this point. No country outside

of the EU has agreed full access to the single market without accepting

paying into the EU, and accepting free movement. In addition, our new

safeguard lives if we vote the leave the EU. We might end up with free

movement, but without these new protections. The fourth area, where

we wanted to make significant changes was to protect our country

from further European political integration, and to increased powers

for our national parliament. Ever since we joined, Europe has been on

the path to something ever closer union. It means a political union.

We have never liked it or wanted it. And now, principal be permanently

and legally excluded from it. The text that is, the treaties will be

changed to make clear, and I quote, the Treaty represents for an ever

closer union do not apply to the United Kingdom. This is bigger, as a

result of this negotiation, perfect in every part of a European Union

superstate. The council also agreed that ever closer union which has

been referred to, and previous estimates from the European Court of

Justice, does not offer a legal basis, for extending the scope of

any provisions of the charges, or any you secretary the translation.

People used to talk about a multispeed Europe, now we have a

clear agreement that not only are different countries able to travel

at different speeds, but they are ultimately able to head to different

destinations as well. I would argue that that is a fundamental change in

the wait is over additional work. We also strengthen the role of this

house and on national parliament, we already passed a referendum act, to

make sure that no powers can be handed to Brussels without this

house and on national parliament, we already passed a referendum act, to

make sure that no powers can be handed to Brussels with updates with

the consent of the British the position we don't want, we can get

together with other parliaments and block it with a red card. And we

have a new mechanism to enforce the principle that as far as possible,

powers to sit here and Westminster, not to Brussels. The European Union

has to go through the powers of the exercise and work-out which are no

longer needed and should be returned to Michigan State. In recent years

we have also seen attempt to bypass are off out on Justice and home

affairs by bringing forward legislation. The agreements and Les

Bleus Council ensures that this can never happen again. The reforms that

we have secured will be legally binding in international law and

will be deposited as a Treaty at the UN. They cannot be unpacked that the

agreement of the prison every other EU countries. As I have said, I'll

28 member states that the treaty will be changed to incorporate

advertisers for the UK as an economy outside the euro zone, and our

permanent exclusion from ever closer union. Mr Speaker, our special

status means that Britain can have the both best of both worlds. Who

will be in the path of Europe that work for us, and so it's a affect

us, in the driving seat of the worlds biggest single market, and

with the ability to take action to keep our people safe. We will be

out of the parts of Europe that do not work for us. Out of the euro, as

of the euro zone bailouts come out of the passport periods no border

area and permanently and legally protected from ever being part of a

ever closer union. Of course there is still more to do, I am the first

to say, that there is though many ways and was organisation needs to

improve. The task of reforming Europe does not and with plastics

agreement. With the special status that the settlement gives the I do

believe that the time has come to fulfilling the other final

commitment that this government made and that is to hold a referendum. Mr

Speaker, this Speaker, I am today commended the process set out from

our act and to propose that the British people decide our future and

Europe to an in and out referendum on Thursday the 23rd of June. The

Foreign Secretary is late and both houses and the government is

negotiating it. This is built into the duty to publish information, set

out in section six of the European Union referendum and that the

Cabinet agreed on Saturday, the government of Zimbabwe to recommend

that person remains in a reformed European Union. This is a vital

decision for the future of our country, I agree that we should also

be clear that it is a final decision. An idea has been put

forward that in the country votes to leave. We can have a second

renegotiation and perhaps another referendum. I want to vote on the

irony that some people who want to vote to leave, apparently want to

use a leave to remain. Such an approach, also ignores more profound

point about democracy, diplomacy and the galaxy. This is a straight

Democratic position. Staying in or leaving and no government can ignore

that. Having a second renegotiation followed by a second referendum is

not on the ballot paper. And for a promise are to ignore the expressed

will of the British people to leave the EU, we are not just from but it

would be undemocratic. On the diplomacy, the idea that the other

European countries will be ready to start a second negotiation is for

the birds. Many are under pressure for what they have already agreed.

Then there is a legality and I want to start off as point for the house

carefully because it is important. If the British people told to leave,

there is only one way to bring that about. That is to trigger article 50

of the treaties and begin the process of exit. The British people

would rightly expect that that should start straightaway. That may

be absolutely clear about how this works. As triggers a two your time

period to negotiate the residence for an exit. At the end of the

stairs, is no group what is in place, then exit is automatic and

left everybody in the other states agrees to a delay. We should be

clear that this process is not a invitation to rejoin, it is a

process for leaving. I have known a number of couples who have began

divorce proceedings, but I do not know an event begun divorce

proceedings and order to renew their marriage vows. LAUGHTER that may

explain, I want to explain what happens when section 50. We should

also be clear... We should also be clear, what would happen if that

deal to leave was not done within two years. Our current access to the

single market would cease immediately, after two your throat.

The current trade agreements with the difficulties across the world

would lapse. This cannot be described as anything other than

risk, uncertainty and a lead in the dark that could hurt working people

and our country for years to come. This is not some theoretical

question, this is a real decision about peoples lives.

When it comes the people stops, it is simply not enough to say it will

be all right on the night that will work it out. I believe that

intermixed the company to properly face up to the economic consequences

of a choice to leave. Mr Speaker, I believe that Britain will be

stronger, safer and better off by remaining in a reformed European

Union. Stronger, because we can play a leading role in one of the worlds

largest organizations from within. Helping to make sure the big

decisions on trade and security that determine our future. Safer, because

the can work with our European partners to fight cross-border crime

and terrorism. And better off because businesses will have full

access to the free-trade single market, bringing jobs, investment

and lower prices. Mr Speaker, there will be much debate about

sovereignty and rightly so, to me, what matters most is the pattern to

get things done for our people and our country. Leaving the EU may

briefly make us feel more sovereign, but would actually give us more

power or influence and a greater ability to get things done? If we

leave, but we have the power to stop opposite is being discriminated

against? No! But we have the power to insist that Europeans countries

share with us their bold information so that we know what there is that

criminals are doing? No! We have more influence over the decisions

that affect the prosperity and security epistemic? Know we won't!

We are a great country! Whatever it was the make, we will still be

great! I believe the choice, is between being and even greater brain

inside how to reform the EU, or a great leap into the unknown! The

Times is facing the West and how to reform the EU, or a great leap into

the unknown! The Times is facing the West today Vladimir Putin aggression

and eases the most extremism to the south, this is in no time to divide

the web. When faced with challenges, and to our way of life, our values

and freedoms, this is it time for strength in numbers. Mr Speaker, let

me end by saying, I am not standing for reelection. I have no other

agenda I have no other agenda than what is best for our country. I am

standing here telling you what I think. My responsibility as prime

minister is to speak plainly about what I believe is right for our

country. That that is what I will do every day for the next four months.

I commend the statements of the house! Thinking is bigger. I would

like to think the promise of four advanced notice of the statement.

And I visited him in a long time to write it because I receded a but

it's as afternoon. -- I received it at 3pm this afternoon. The people of

Britain face in-store price on the 23rd of June on whether to remain

part of the European Union went to leave. We welcome the fact that it

is now the hands of the people on this issue. We are wanting to stay

and because he believed that the European Union has brought

investment jobs and protection for work of consumers and the

environment. We are convinced that a vote to remain as of the best

interest of the people. And the 21st-century Mr Speaker, as a

country and a consummate and as the human race. We faced with

challenging issues. How to tackle climate change, how to address the

power of global corporations, how to ensure that they pay state taxes.

How to tackle cyber crime and terrorism, I would trade fairly and

protect jobs and pay in an era of globalisation. How we address the

causes of the huge refugee movement across the world. How would add that

to a world where people of all countries, move more frequently to

live, work and retire. All of these issues are serious, pressing and

self-evidently can only be solved by international cooperation. The

European Union will be a vital part of how we as a country meet those

challenges. Therefore Mr Speaker. That is more than disappointing that

the prime Minister Steele has failed to address a single one of those

issues. Last week, like him, I was in Brussels, meeting with heads of

governments and leaders of European Union Socialist party. One of them

said to me, what they said, if the party opposite of what

had to think for a moment about what's going on. One person said to

me, I follows quite profound, he said we are discussing the future of

a continent. And one English Tory has reduced it to the issue of

taking away benefits from workers and children. The reality Mr

Speaker, is that this entire negotiation has not been about the

challenges facing our confidence, neither has it been about the issues

facing the people of Britain it is a theatrical sideshow about trying to

appease or failing to appease the half of the Prime Minister is all

the conservative party. That is not to say that there has not been

somewhat worthwhile changes. The Redcar assist him, to strengthen the

house of national parliament is something we and these mentors have

long back, the labor and elastin last in Iraq's election. It was not

of the conservative man manifesto but we welcome this. We also welcome

the symbolic amendment on ever closer union. Britain's

long-standing position not to join has been such an accepted. We see

the influence of Tory party funders, on a Prime Minister vessel status,

not for Britain but the city of London. It is the same essence of

that caused his the Chancellor to rush to Europe with an army of

lawyers to oppose any regulation of the grotesque level of bankers

bonuses. It is necessary to protect the rights of 9 euros on states, but

not to undermine EU wide efforts to regulate the financial sector,

including the border. Liberals stand for a different approach. That's a

labor. That is why members of the European Parliament is a opposing

the transatlantic trade negotiations was trying to undermine national

sovereignty, push the privatsation of public services, drive down

standards for workers and consumers, Mr Speaker, human rights should be

but part of that treaty. I believe it should be happy feature of all

trade treaties. Then, there is the so-called emergency brake. We

support the principle of Peart Constitution. However, does the

evidence not back-up the claim that an overt benefits are significant

draw for workers who come to Britain from the European Union. The changes

he promised is secured do nothing to address the real challenges of low

pay and prevent undercutting of local rates rates and and is derived

pay agreements, they won't put a penny in the pockets of workers and

Britain nor will they stop the grotesque exploitation of many

migrant workers, or reduce migration to Britain. Will the promised to

tell us what discussions he has had to get European roles and place to

protect the going rates and to stop agencies bragging and cheap labor,

to undercut workers and Britain, while the exploit to undercut

workers and Britain, while exploiting the martyr for his? The

Dees the two of the EU leaders about outlawing the so-called Buddhist

derogation from the edge workers directive for which threatens to

undermine one of the key achievements of the last Labour

government by allowing them to use them agency staff to undercut other

workers? These would have been positive and worthwhile discussions

to tackle low-paid, reduce benefit cost and protect workers. We must on

all of the speaker, be clear that Britain has benefited from

migration. From EU workers coming into wrecking our industry to our

other public services to fill gaps. The thousands of doctors and nurses

who work in our national health service is saving lives every day.

The European Union has delivered protection from workers, it would

labor that made sure that Britain's EU membership if work is right to

make minimum paid leave and protection on working time is ripe

for agency workers, paid maternity and paternity leave, equal pay,

anti-discrimination laws, and protection for the work force with

companies changed ownership. It was labor working partnership with the

parties and unions across Europe that makes of the vehicle promise of

the vehicle promise of attempt to diminish workers rights was kept off

the agenda of these EU negotiations. Labor has supported, move to reduce

child benefits and nonresident children as a reasonable amendment,

however we also welcome protection for 20 and so that families have the

ability of income. The prominence it still includes consignments. But it

a closet and irrelevant to the choice facing the British people.

Not one to go I facing the British people. Not one fickle element that

is a significant impact on the Kevin Kisner and stay in. We welcome

the fact the theatrical sideshow is over. We want to make a real case

that will be put by my friend the Member for who really are camping.

Labor believes the EU is a model framework for European trade and

cooperation in the 21st century. Not only what the EU delivered today but

as a framework through which we can achieve much more in the future. To

deliver these progressive reforms that I have referred to, when he to

work with our partners and Europe to achieve them. Therefore, we must

ensure that remain a member. That is the case are going to be making for

a Europe that is socially cohesive, a Europe that share the benefit of

wealth and prosperity amongst all of its citizens. But as the case we are

making as Labour Party, as a trade union movement in this country and

we look forward to that public debate. By Magomed have the opposite

spin for his contribution. He and I disagree on a lot of things about

economic policy about social policy about welfare policy, and did you

even disagree on the approach we should take within and Europe as a

gas as demonstrated in his the spots, but we do both agree about

one thing, which says that Britain should be in there fighting for a

good deal for our country. I were a little for the ombudsman because he

will be accused of fossils of things. Some of the verism of the

unfair. If the Texas courts will be accused of being a member of the

establishment. That'll be the most unfair attack of all. What he said

about the deal, than they make two points about why I think he should

welcome the deal, the first is that implements, as far as I can see him

as every pledged on Europe and the Labour manifesto, I'm looking at the

former leader. They pledged to complete the former leader. They

pledged to complete physical market, they pledged for budget discipline.

They said that we will ensure that EU rules protect the interest of 9

euros members. He went on and said that people coming to Britain from

the EU to look for work, are expected to contribute to our

economy and to our society so that we will secure is to immigration and

Social Security reform. It also says and I quote," we would work to

strengthen,... I'm just reminding my new friend what they said that the

election. They said this "We will work just as the influence of

national parliaments over Europe in the session by our group for Redcar

mechanism for never states." Excellent. Where I think the right

of him was unfair is that he's said that this deal was really all about

Britain, and not about anyone else. I would point out the Slovakian

Prime Minister said good, the myth about every quote didn't have

followed. The Hungarian prime minister said that the UK managed to

put an end to the practice of creeping power withdraw from

national member states. The former president of the commission said

that the real consequence of the summit is missionary important.

Brussels has an shot a multispeed Europe. This is beneficial to your.

Where I disagreed with the ombudsman is I think that these trade deals

are good for Britain and is to redo them we the better. I think he's

wrong about financial services. That was well received -- and outside of

the southern city of London and five. Crucially, what the single

market means is that with one establishment and Britain, you can

trade throughout the European Union. Booze it and do the job going for

Labor government than the care we have all had our difficulties with

your. We have all went to the debug the damn. But if I want to get

powers in turn, we have all found that because of I love for this

house, we found this process trying but at the end of the day we always

know when it comes to our economy and prosperity we're

will be Prime Minister agree that if he refers to the continental press

he will see that he has demonstrated the influence of a British prime

minister. He has actually -- it will be difficult for the fellow Prime

Minister is to sell to their own political establishment. Does he

agree with me that future generations will benefit from some

of those concessions, particularly those on and marching the single

market, guaranteeing our excess, deregulating, and regular eating

trade deals. Is he agree that it is not the politics of fear to point

out that those who advocate a no vote don't seem to know what a no

vote means? If they continually imply that somehow all of the

benefits that flow from Europe in terms of jobs, investment,

insecurity, will somehow continue to come here when they have swept away

the obligations that previous British governments have always

accepted? I am grateful for my right honourable friend says. In terms of

what... It has been interesting on what some of the four newspapers

have set. I will get you one example. Spanish paper has said that

British execs in reality beaches new heights yesterday. No other country

to its more acceptance in Europe. I am proud of that fact. We do have a

different status in Europe, and that has become more special with the

changes that we have made. I think that the point that my friend makes

is absolutely right. They recognise that there are disadvantages for

being in the European Union, I make no bones about that. I can that be

but his people in the eye and say this is what it is going to be like

if we state them. It was going to be better because of the deal that we

have done. The people that are advising us to leave have to spell

out what the consequences of leaving are, and I think that the absolute

lodestar is that no country has been able to get full access to the

single market without accepting either paying into the EU are

accepting free movement. If you don't want to accept those two

things, I think you have to start accepting that you are not going to

get as good of trade and business position as we have today. People

that want to be going to start making up their mind. Do you want a

Norway deal? A Switzerland deal, a candidate deal? I don't care which

deal you like, but we had to tell people because they deserve an

answer. May I begin by thinking the Prime Minister for advanced side of

the statement. The referendum choice before the electorate is a huge one

which will define our relationship with the rest of Europe, and indeed

the nations of the United Kingdom. Scotland is a European nation, and

the SNP is a European party. We will campaign positively to remain in the

EU, hopefully the Prime Minister can confirm today that he will reject

the tactics of project fear and make a positive case for remaining part

of a reforming European Union. It is hugely important to be a part of the

largest market in the world, and to be able to influence its rules and

laws. In rolling matters that the -- it matters that we can co-operate

for rights. We should also forget the lessons of European history, and

not turn our backs on European neighbours who need help at this

time to deal with a huge challenge including migration. Mr Speaker.

Public opinion in Scotland, a majority, supports membership of the

European Union. Every single Scottish MP -- MP supports

. Does the Prime Minister have any idea what the consequences would be

of Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wish of the Scottish

electorate? I want Scotland and the rest of the UK to remain within the

European Union. However, if we are forced out of the EU, I am certain

about public in Scotland will to read -- demand a referendum on

Scottish independence and we will protect our place in Europe. First

of all, I can confirm that I will make a positive case. A case based

around there and being stronger, safer, and better off. This is a

choice. I think that it is very important that we set out the toys,

and the alternative, to the British people. This is the most important

decision that people are going to make on a political issue

potentially and their lifetimes. I don't want anyone to take a step

into the dark without properly thinking through what the

consequences are. One thing I actually agree with the honourable

gentleman about, is that although Brussels and the institutions can be

frustrating, we should never forget what brought this institution into

being and the first place. Even at the most frustrating time of talks,

you look around the table and think of how these countries fought and

killed each other for so long. The dialogue that they take together is

positive. In terms of the boat in Scotland, this is one UK boat. Hear,

hear! -- vote. My right honourable friend has just spoken about

national parliaments, democracy, and our sovereignty. In the Bloomberg

speech, he made it clear that he regarded our national parliament as

being the root of our democracy. Yesterday, he referred to the

Aleutian of sovereignty. -- illusion of sovereignty. Will he explain and

repudiate that statement and reference to the question before us

in relation to our parliament and democracy in the making of our laws,

which at this moment in time under the European committees act, are

made by a majority vote of other countries, are introduced by it an

unelected commission, and are enforced by a court of justice. This

is not excepted the only way of out of that is to lead the European

Union? First of all, I have huge respect for my European --

honourable friend who has campaigned for many years. One thing that he

will welcome is that we are allowing the British people a choice to stay

in or lead the European Union. Let me confirm that yes, this parliament

is sovereign. We chose to join the the European Union and we can choose

to be. But me explain exactly what I meant by saying that it would be the

illusion of sovereignty. Let me take one issue. We now have safeguards so

that British banks, businesses, cannot be discriminated against if

we state in the European Union. They can't be discriminated against

because we are not in the euro. Where are we to lead, obviously we

would not have that protection. They could discriminate against us, and

frankly I think they would discriminate against us. Therefore,

and that way, we might feel more sovereign, but it would be an

illusion of sovereignty because he would not have the power to protect

the businesses that protect jobs of my ability and our country. Despite

assurances, it is worth saying that this referendum is about the future

of our country not the future of a divided conservative party. With the

Prime Minister agree with me that it is also not just about Britain's

place in the European Union, but also print's place in the world.

President Obama has been crystal clear that if Britain were to be the

European Union, it would weaken not strengthen the special relationship.

The Indians, Chinese, I'm mystified that we are even risking exit from

the European Union. We agree with me that if rain in the teacher wants to

stand tall in New Delhi, Beijing, Washington, and other mobile

cobbles, Britain must continue to stand tall in our own European

neighbourhood. I think that she he is right. We should make this

decision ourselves as a sovereign nation in a sovereign people. I

think that it is worth listening to our friends and listening to what

they think is best for our country. I have to say all of the leaders and

politicians I have backed around the world. I can't think of any of our

friends, Australia, New Zealand, America, Canada. That one is to be

the EU. The only person I think that might want us to leave is Vladimir

Putin, and I don't think that that is someone who has asked for what

the right honourable friend and colleague said about this

referendum. I will make a cheeky point that we are implementing the

2010 Lib Dem manifesto by holding it. Hear, hear! LAUGHTER Can I ask

my right honourable friend, the Prime Minister, to explain to the

House into the country exactly what way this deal returns sovereignty

over any field of lawmaking to the Houses of Parliament? This deal

brings back some welfare powers, immigration powers, bailout powers,

but more than that, because it cards us forever out of ever closer union

it means that the ratchet of the European Court taking power away

from this country cannot happen in future. To those who worry, and

people do worry, that if somehow if we vote to remain and, the

consequence could be more action and Brussels to try and change the

agreements that we have. We have a lot in this house of commons. No

power can be passed from Britain to Brussels without a referendum. We

have a better deal, and a special status, we have a chance to make

sure that we build on what we have to protect our people. We can

enhance our prosperity, and that is the we make. Mr Speaker, let me

think the Prime Minister for quoting and implementing parts of the plane

15 Lib Dem manifesto. I wanted to go to the big picture question, which

is about how we influence things in our national interest. I want to

draw the Prime Minister of the powerful and that his statement,

which is this question of course by being a member of the European Union

we don't always get our own way, but as he said to the right honourable

member on all of the major issues, whether it is trade or climate

change, or terrorism and security, he can tell us because he has been

the Prime Minister what does he believe. We have more influence in

the European Union or outside? Mr Speaker, surely the answer is more

influence inside the European Union, at outside. That is why I

passionately believe must remain in the European Union. I am grateful to

the right honourable gentleman for what he says. I can't promise to

implement any part of the bigger manifesto, but I am glad to have

been an assistant there. I actually agree with him. The big picture is

this, when it comes to getting things done in the world that can

help keep people safe in our country, a bigger, better deal on

climate change, do we get more because we are in the EU? Gas.

Making sure that we have sanctions against Iran that work and getting a

ban on their nuclear programme, to be deducted the EU and other new

bodies? Yes absolutely. Making sure that we stand up to Russian

aggression in Ukraine. We have been the linchpin between the European

Union and the United States of America in making those ancient

town. If we had been outside the European Union, we would have been

waiting at the end of the fund to make out with the decisions were

going to be. Instead, we were making them and them. That is how we get

things done for our people. Mr Speaker, according to the website,

there is a letter and peering into mile's times which has been bitten

by a Chris Hopkins on behalf of organizations across the UK wishing

for us to remain. Chris Hopkins is apparently a civil servant, could be

Prime Minister tell us who that is, which department does he work for,

and what authority does he have as a civil servant to campaign for the

remaining? I can answer very simply. He is a civil servant working and

number ten, and his authority comes from me. He is doing an excellent

job. This is not a free-for-all. The government has a clear view. The

government's view is that we should remain an informed European Union.

The civil service is able to support the government and not roll. Of

course, members of Parliament, members -- common members are middle

to make their own decision. The Cabinet is holding back. We have a

full throated view that we should put Ford in front of the British

people so that they I am tempted to think -- ask the

Prime Minister if bonds have more fun. -- blonds. If does he remember

what the government did in 2014 about the European arrest warrant,

and the conclusions that the European arrest warrant acts as a

deterrent for offenders commit to this country. Katie pointed out to

his pension secretary, and can he ask the home Secretary to bring the

working pension secretary on all the other reasons why Britain is safer

and more secure in the European Union. The European arrest warrant

is a good case in point. I think that all of us who do have this

concern about sovereignty have are concerned about the arrest warrant,

but look at what has happened in practice. In 2005, terrorists tried

to bomb our city for a second time. One of them escaped and was arrested

and returned to Britain within weeks under the European arrest warrant.

Before that, it could have taken years. I think that we can all see

that the practical application of these changes definitely keeps us

more safe. When it comes to this question of fighting terrorism a

cross-border crime, obviously people are going to have different

opinions. I would urge people, listen to the head of the former

director of MIT. Listen to the head of euro poll. These are people who

know what they speak of and are very clear. These measures help us to

stay safe. Thank you Mr Speaker. Having spent the best part of recess

and the Arctic circle with the Royal Marines, I am extremely conscious of

the need to ensure that everyone of our serving military personnel will

be able to cast their vote to leave or to remain in the forthcoming EU

referendum which the Prime Minister has worked so hard to get onto the

statue books for us. Can the Prime Minister please confirm that every

serving member of our armed forces wherever they are in the world, will

be entitled to vote and can they guarantee that they will receive

their ballot papers in good time, and confirm hubby will ensure that

everyone will be counted? My honourable friend clearly had a more

entertaining recess that I did, but I am rather jealous. There were

moments that I wish I was in the Arctic Circle, I can tell you. I

believe that the arrangements are absolutely the same. As for a

general election. We have for months until the referendum, there is

plenty of time to put in place the arrangements that she seeks. I pay

credits to be Prime Minister for delivering a reference to the

British people. I will remember the time that he came to the -- this

house and argue to -- but the referendum. He will know that we are

extremely disappointed in these benches that we don't have as a

result of this deal control over our sovereignty over our borders, or our

finances. He had said to in his statement, and I quote, that is

simply not enough for those in the meat side to say that it will be all

right and that we will work it out. He wants a definite facts. On the of

migrants coming to Britain in the United Kingdom, when will they first

begin to be eligible for some of the darker benefits for quick. What we

have is a phased approach so that over four years they get access to

benefits. No access to benefits to start with, and full access only

after four years. That is a huge advance. If I compare that to a lack

of certainty that we are being offered for people who want to

leave, who can't tell us whether they favour a model like Norway or

Switzerland, where if they want a trade deal like Canada, or if

someone to reclaim a purely WTO position. We need to know the answer

to that, because frankly it is only one me know that that people can

make a proper judgement about the security of staying in any dangers

of getting out. Last week's decision requires it to be changed to be

irreversible and legally binding. When will the ratification procedure

began? I am afraid that my right honourable friend is not right. It

is already legally binding and universal because this is the

decision of 28 governments to reach a legally binding decision that is

deposited as a legal document at the UN. This can only be reversed if all

28 members, including the UK, were to come to a different decision. The

document sets out very clearly that into specific areas, the changes

that we need to the treaty on closer union and safeguards for businesses

and countries outside the euro zone, will be put into the treaty as well.

The mayor of London has been touted of the leader of the lease campaigns

said yesterday that the burden will be able to negotiate a large number

of shady deals at great speed because we used to run the against

Empire and the world. Will he invite the Mayor to wake up to the 21st

century in which the European economy is six times longer than

endure -- took seven years to get Canada to get a trade deal, and with

so much uncertainty in the world's economy it would be deeply disrupted

to increase the risk for British exporters, British manufacturers,

and British shops? Let me say, where I share the frustration of many of

those who are questioning whether B should stay in a separate Britain

does need trade deals to be signed rapidly. We do find it frustrating

that Europe is not moving faster. The Korean free trade agreement has

been excellent, and about to push ahead with Japan, Canada, and

America, and China. Because of this document all of the single more

likely. Where I think that the right honourable lady has a good point is

this. You can't sign trade deals with other countries until you have

determined the nature of your relationship with the EU from the

outside. That would take at least two years, and then you have to

think how long does it take to sign trade deals? The Canada deal is in

its seventh year, and it is still not put in place. I worry that this

is a recipe for uncertainty and risk. Business is literally would

not know what the arrangements were for year after year, and British

business and jobs, and our country would suffer as a result. I have

pamphlets calling for us to address our role in by a referendum on art

EU membership may have escaped the Prime minister's attention. He will

understand why I am absolutely delighted that he is now provided us

an opportunity to resolve this question for a generation. Does he

agree with me that if the country votes to remain we must positively

commit to the institutions of the European Union? To best ensure its

success and to move on from the growth -- grudging tone that has

dominated our discourse. Equally, the establishment that he leads must

positively engaged with a potential decision to lead -- leave and

undertake reasonable contingency planning now. Let me make a couple

of points to my honourable friend. First of all, one of the things of

this renegotiation does is that it does address some of the principal

grudges, that I think that this country has rightly had. Too much of

a single currency club, political union, too much in terms of

migration and a lack of respect for welfare system. Not enough

competitiveness and removing bureaucracy. Having dealt with some

of these grudges, it may, yes, P possible make sure that we get more

things done that says -- sued us. I also agree that something with them

-- agree with the Mayor of London said that we have high-quality

British officials at every part of this organizations that we can help

to drive the agenda. He is right. This should settle this issue for

generation. He is also right that we will be publishing the alternatives

to membership so that people can see what they are, and also people can

see that there are plans that can be made. The Prime Minister has said

that there has been great to perform grant in the renegotiation, why then

did the French president say the European Union has not granted the

United Kingdom any special dispositions from its rules in a

deal struck? He went on to say that the Prime Minister said that the

city of London when I have special status compared to Europe other

stock exchanges? Why is this is a difference between what the French

president is saying and what the Prime Minister is an? What I would

say is that the French Foreign Minister said that the agreement

with the British is a recognition that there is a differentiated

Europe. I have Artie quantity so backend, Hungarian prime ministers,

and the former tying commissioner. Also, Fran ois Hollande said this,

we have recognised British position not in singing, not in the former

tying commissioner. Also, Fran ois Hollande said this, we have

recognised British position not in singing, not in a euro zone. She

does not -- but it has Britain has a special status in Europe. While the

referendum decision is a matter for the British people, as

does the Prime Minister recognised concern from the White House,

Pentagon, State Department, and international players that have

already Bedminster macro mentioned. That's ready to stand together in an

unsafe world? I my honourable friend Nixon point. I don't think

I think that it is based on the fact that they believe that Britain will

be a stronger partner, more able to get things done, more able to bend

at the will of other countries that are in America's directions when it

comes to solving great prices. If you ask yourself how do we need is

to reduce pirate attacks off Somalia, how would go to try to fix

the problems of Libya's border. Yes, we can act unilaterally, and there

are valuable partnerships and Nato, but these EU producers are worth a

lot to. The views that the pound has slipped to its lowest level in seven

years on the news that the honourable member has joined the

league campaign, are the just getting a glimpse of the major

economic upheaval that could follow if we leave the European Union? Is