21/03/2016 House of Commons

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if you will make a

statement on changes to the budget? Mr Speaker, immediately after this

urgent question, the prime minister will make a statement, following a

Secretary of State for work and agents will sit out a government

position on payments and developer gap. For the rest of the date the

debates on the budget will continue, and tomorrow we will continue with

the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The house will have three opportunities

to discuss these issues before tomorrow. I am grateful for the

opportunity to talk about how this government, through our long-term

economic plan, is creating growth, generating employment, cutting the

deficit, and securing long-term prosperity for the people of this

country. The budget delivered last week by my right honourable friend

the Chancellor of the Exchequer said how we are taking more people out of

income tax, supporting small businesses, encouraging investment,

tackling tax avoidance, helping young people safe, and investing in

our education system, all while restoring the public finances. That

is what the British people voted for last May, and that is what we are

delivering. Thank you for granting this urgent question. I asked

because the budget process is an absolute chaos. It is unprecedented

for a government to withdraw a large part of its budget and except to

oppositional amends before they even reach the third day. I have to say

that we are little wiser from what we have heard from the check

secretary today. I have some of for the honourable gentleman who yet

again set out to defend the indefensible while the Chancellor

insults this house by refusing to attend. This whole debacle started

two weeks ago when the government announced cuts of up to hundred

pounds a week to disabled people. Last week we discovered that these

cuts to disabled people had been forced through by the Chancellor to

pay for cuts in capital gains taxes for the buggiest 5% in our society.

And cuts and corporation tax. I agree with the pension secretary

that these are not defensible when placed in a budget that benefits

irons. Can ask the question, how can the Chancellor suggest that we are

all in this together when the ISS confirmed today that households that

are the poorest with children are hit the hardest? Over 600,000

disabled people and their family have been caused considerable

distress, and they need the reassurance that their benefits are

safe. The money required from the DWP still sit in the Redbook. Can

ask the chief Secretary, can he tell us which other vulnerable groups the

Chancellor is considering targeting for cuts? If the Chancellor holds

the attacks on disabled people, a ?4.4 billion black hole is created

in the budget. Added to this the billions of unidentified cuts, taxes

on solar, we have one today. An enormous hole has appeared in the

budget, and isn't the best thing to do withdraw the budget and start

again? This is no way to deliver a budget, and no way to manage an

economy. First of all, then I think the shadow chancellor for promoting

me to chief Secretary of the Treasury. Secondly, to make the

point that in terms of disability benefits, there is no question of

this government cutting disability benefits back to the level we

inherited in 2010. Spending has gone up by it ?3 billion in real terms on

disability benefits. Thirdly, is the shadow Chancellor really wanting to

talk about fiscal black holes? Mr Speaker, last week the Chancellor of

the Exchequer reported on an economy set to grow faster than any other

major advanced economy in the world. Wages are up, the deficit is cut by

almost two thirds, there are a thousand people in work almost every

single day, our plan is delivering for Britain. It is a plan that

continues recovery, it will take us into a surplus, it backs British

businesses I'm a protect jobs in difficult economic times, a budget

that helps more people buy their first home or save for their

retirement, a budget that builds our young people skills to invest in

generation. It helps close the gap between the rich and poor, between

North and South, because we believe in helping people succeed wherever

they come from. Since 2010, inequality is down, child poverty is

down, pension property is down, the gender pay that gap is smaller than

ever -- when the Minister is addressing the house, he is entitled

to be heard. He is raising his voice, but it should be no

requirement to do so. Experience shows that all sides of the argument

will be heard. Members need have no worry on that score. The Minister in

the first instance must be heard. Minister. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The

richest 1% are paying a greater proportion of income tax than in any

other year in the Labour government. This is the government introduced

the national living wage, the government that increased personal

allowance so that in a year a taxpayer will pay over ?1000 less in

tax than they were in 2010. This is the government that is helping to

generate record numbers of jobs on the helping young people get on the

property ladder, increasing spending on health and education and

disability benefits. Protecting pensions, helping people achieve

their aspirations at every stage of their lives, delivering for Britain,

creating economic security with jobs and growth. This is the record of

this government, that is the record of the Chancellor of the Exchequer,

and it is a record two to be proud of. Would might friend the financial

Secretary agree with me that the first duty of the Chancellor and his

Treasury team, when preparing a budget, is to watch the medium-term

national interests and provide sound finances for the benefit of our

businesses, investments, and our appointment. If we turn to a

situation where chancellors are expected to produce on every

occasion populace spending commitments, popular tax cuts, and a

failure to control an out-of-control budget, we are going to go to the

sort of economic performance achieved by the recent governments

of Greece, Italy, or the United Kingdom under Gordon Brown. I agree,

and it is by taking that long-term approach that we are taking it now

so that we can secure prosperity and economic security for the British

people. We will shortly have a statement from the AWP which, if

rumours are correct, will announce a substantial change to the budget

announcements from last week. It is likely to amount to substantial

extra borrowing, extra taxes, or potentially, the charting of the

fiscal charter rules. This is a substantial change like the budget

last week. Surely, it would require a supplementary, corrective budget?

Can ask the Minister has the Chancellor penciled in a date for a

summit? As he says, we have a statement from the Secretary of

State for Work and Pensions, and would have two days of budget

debates. And I make the point that in terms of changes to the fiscal

position, I think that we should look at the consequences for

Scotland if it had been independent? On the 9th of December, the

government issued a document announcing an increase in VAT on

energy saving materials from five to 20% to raise 65 million in the first

full year. Then I welcome the government's decision not to go

ahead with that proposal, and how are they going to deal with the fact

that the European Court and European laws require us to impose this

unpopular tax? The decision was taken some weeks ago not to proceed

in this finance built with any changes to VAT on energy-saving

materials, because new material has emerged that we do not need to go

ahead with what was suggested. The prime minister will say something

about this later, it has been suggested, because the European

commission agreed to the arguments that we have made about greater

flexibility on VAT rates, that we do not believe that these changes will

be necessary. Five days ago, the Chancellor stood at the dispatch

box, published the budget's scorecard with a ?4.4 billion cut to

PIP. Where is the revised scorecard without it? Is it true that this cut

will instead come from elsewhere in the DWP budget? And if the

Chancellor is too scared to answer questions in this House on the

issue, he is not fit to do the job. The Chancellor will be debating the

finance Bill, the budget resolutions tomorrow evening. He will be the

first Chancellor of the Exchequer to have done so since my friend the

member rock live. Gordon Brown never once participated on debates in the

budget apart from his initial speech. In terms of the public

finances, as far as they're concerned in terms of compliance

with the welfare gap, we will set that out at the Autumn Statement.

Let's be absolutely clear. For the party opposite to be upset about the

public finances, they shouldn't listen to what they have been saying

for the last six years. My honourable friend will know that the

armed Forces are, sadly, not immune from members suffering from mental

health problems, and some of them take their own lives. May I thank

him and my right honourable friend the Chancellor, as a member of the

advisory board for Samaritans, for the three and half billion pounds

that they have given to assist military personnel who are suffering

in that way. I'm very grateful to my right honourable friend for

highlighting that point. There is a serious problem with the votes that

we have two make a decision on the budget tomorrow. How will we make

the judgement when the page in the Redbook has been ripped up and

changed, and we are none the wiser about the contents of that? He has

just got to answer one question, on a scale of 1-10, how embarrassed if

he today? I would be a little embarrassed if I was the honourable

member for not being aware that there are no votes tomorrow on the

personal independent payments. The role of the budget is surely to

promote growth and promote employment. Has he noticed that

small business rate relief measures have been widely welcomed, and as

growth we need and targets unemployment across all status of

people? He is right, and there has been support for the contents of

this budget and small businesses. This government-backed small

businesses to ensure growth and implement opportunities that the

British people need top green I regret the chaos that one attends to

get with unstable -- the Chancellor's budget

leave the richest 10% of people to hundred and ?60 better off, and

until that was found out, that was going to be paid for by punishing

the disabled. Doesn't this conjuring show that his choices are driven by

cynical politics and not economic necessity? So this charter, should

therefore be scrapped? Let me point out to the house at 28% of income

tax was paid by 1% of taxpayers in 2013 to 2014. The fact is that under

the policies that we have, the 20% wealthiest will be paying more tax

revenues. That would not have happened if we stuck with the tax

system we had in 2010. Would the Minister agree with me that what the

British people want, what they voted for ten months ago was a government

which was encouraging growth, creating employment unseen for

years, and still focuses on investment in health services and

investment in medical health, and other issues that make this a

compassionate, conservative government? My honourable friend

puts it extremely well. Last maybe British people endorse our long-term

economic planning, and you have to stick to it. I as the financial

Secretary has said, he cut in business rates has been welcomed by

the small business community. In oral questions an hour ago,

ministers said that local authorities would be completely

compensated for this reduction. There is no sign of that in the

Redbook. Isn't this another 1.7 billing black hole? No, it isn't.

Local authorities will be compensated. I very much support the

Chancellor and wanting to live within our means and trying to be

the budget to balance as quickly as possible. In my normal spirit of

helpfulness, can I suggest that the problem that we have at the moment

is that there are too many government departments with the same

departments having to face cut year after year, and it is time to end

this ludicrous policy? Although I appreciate the spirit of

helpfulness, I am afraid that I don't agree with him. It was a

manifesto commitment by our party that we would fulfil our target. It

was once said that a week is a long time in politics. How long is a

long-term economic plan? Three days? Four days? Five days? Let's be

clear, this is a government that has turned the economy around, that has

delivered this country from -- into the fastest growing economy in 2014,

is forecast to be the fastest growing again, we have record

unemployment, and that is what this government is delivering and we will

continue to deliver it. With the financial Secretary confirm that

spending on disability payments has increased by ?2 billion over the

last five years, and will increase by millions more over the coming

five years? Actually, it is slightly more than that of the last five

years. The reality is that disability spending has risen

significantly under this government, even though we inherited the largest

deficit in our peacetime history. Today's urgent question isn't just

about the budget documentation or the EU referendum, nor who will be

the next leader of the Tory party, by the hundreds of thousands of

disabled people across this country and their fate. Will the Minister

take the opportunity to apologise to all of the disabled people across

the country will be left in turmoil over the past few days in relation

to the support, if any, that there would be for this government, and

what would the future plans before them? We have increased spending on

the disabled. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for

Work and Pensions will be making a statement on government policy in

this area surely this afternoon. You frequently remind us, Mr Speaker,

about people listening and watching at home. On the second day of the

budget debate, the shadow Chancellor pledged that if the government would

look again at the plant, they would not play politics. Would my right

honourable friend agree with me that this is too serious of an issue to

play politics with? I think my honourable friend has had a point.

We have had assurances about not playing politics once or twice

before from the shadow Chancellor. I'm not sure she has always

delivered on that. Last week's budget makes the 2012 budget of like

a model of good policymaking. Is the Redbook is still the basis for the

budget, and if it is with the ?4.4 billion cut to disability benefits

still stand? Of the plans we have set out, by the end of this

Parliament we will deliver a budget surplus that would have never

happened if we had followed the plans of the party opposite. 600,000

small businesses will benefit from the rate relief cut. With the chief

secretary continue to support those small businesses -- the financial

Secretary, who generate the jobs for people who want to work, and

generate text for the people who can't? I can give that assurance.

This government is on the side of businesses that create the growth

and jobs that that we need. The biggest threat to recovery is the

anti-business approach that we see from the party opposite. One of the

most disregarded mysteries of the budget is the announcement of a

growth field that seems to exist in name only. With the Mr Eleni house

to its details? We will be engaging with the Welsh Government and local

authorities on this point. The future for the Welsh economy will be

best pursued by electing a conservative government indwells as

well as any United Kingdom. Will he agreed that it is anchored to the

steadfast stewardship of the Chancellor of the Treasury team that

this year we have been able to introduce a budget that has

supported small businesses, supported the motorist, supported

local brewers and the public industry, and is continuing policies

that support business and creates jobs. It is only state -- steadfast

commitment that delivers that. This is a government and this is a

Chancellor of the X check with drives the economy. We are in

position to run more strongly -- grow more slowly than our

competitors, especially given that we inherited the mess that we

inherited. The Chancellor made no effort to justify the cut in

disability benefits beyond saying that they would save a lot of money.

Yesterday we heard from the former DWP Secretary that the Chancellor's

view that people with disabilities will never vote Tory. Will he

respond to that? Act wasn't even at the -- that wasn't even the

allegation, but if we look at the facts, independent payments have

gone up by ?3 billion. That is not a government that is cutting at the

expense of disabled people. In the Minister confirm that as well as

continuing to take many of my constituents from paying income tax

as well as shifting the burden of taxes from small to larger

businesses, this government remains committed to shortening the

disability gap -- income inequality gap? I pointed out earlier that the

Secretary of State for wealth and pensions will be addressing this

point later this afternoon. Last Wednesday, the Chancellor announced

that this was a budget for the next generation. Which member of the next

generation will succeed the Chancellor? Is that really the best

the honourable member can do? Does my honourable friend agree with me

that the best way of reducing the welfare bill is to create more jobs,

and to give people the opportunity of the dignity of earning their own

living rather than being stuck for life on benefits? He is right, and

that is why we should all be delighted in this house that we have

record number of people in work. As of last Wednesday, this Chancellor

had delivered five budgets in 15 months. That is one every three

months. Will you try to improve on that record, and give us one every

week? I feel the quality of the questions might be deteriorating.

The answer is no. I'm sure the Minister will share the urgent

question is laying off the debate on a budget. Will he assure me that

looking at budgets will be more concerned with thoughts on a

long-term economic policy than on Chairman Mao? I am delighted that

the quality of questions have improved, he is right.

A simple question, when will the budget schedule be published? We

have a debate on the budget today, and tomorrow. The Chancellor will be

responding to the debate tomorrow. In terms of any future changes of

the physical evidence, there will be an understatement in the autumn.

Will my honourable friend confirm that the budget, the many positive

things in the budget including the small business rates and the tax

threshold changes that take a lot of people who should never have been

caught up in a tax threshold will go ahead as planned? Yes, I can confirm

that. The change to small business rate relief will help hundreds of

thousands of businesses, small businesses in particular. We are

delivering on the pledge in the conservative party manifesto about

increasing the threshold to ?50,000. This budget take it to 40,000, but

we are also raising the personal allowance, and it is the case that

the typical taxpayer is now paying over a thousand times less income

tax as a consequence of the changes that we have put in. The Minister

talked about debt, and our record. The last government borrowed more in

five years in the Labour government did and 30. Then I asked, the

members opposite are clamoring for a change about the PIP payments. If

that is the case, why not reverse another measure that hits the

disabled, the better attacks? -- bedroom tax? We debated earlier with

the party opposite measures to reduce spending. They argued that we

should borrow more, presumably from what the honourable member has just

said in order to borrow less. If that is the position of the shadow

shadow chancellor, it is not much of an improvement from the chatter

Chancellor. In terms of the Spirit room with subsidy, it is right that

we try to find savings within the welfare budget, and the subsidy is a

part of that. before I became an member of

Parliament are was a goodly part of this country. What my Honorable

friend agree with me that we have cut back on the red tape and put

more money into the self-employed is more than what the last part of dead

and 13 years. I was a self-employed person so I can stick with Doherty

on that. My Honorable friend brings much expertise this issue, I know

that he is very pleased, one of the things that we were able to do was

to finally remove class to national insurance contributions and

management of burden. I'm pleased he could remove it. Mr Speaker, can I

reflect the shock and sadness and my own constituency, of the loss of

life of a family, last night, can I ask of the financial Secretary how

can he continue to talk about a long-term economic plan when he is

describing what our increasingly tough about budget and when will

deed government finally move and stop using it as a search engines

for benefit costs? Can I associate myself with his own and perhaps

through him express the condolences throughout the house to the family

that suffered so grievously last night. In terms of the government of

throats, we do believe that it isn't interest of the whole of the country

that the public finances on a sound footing. Reducing the deficit from a

record level to surplus, is a significant challenge but it is one

that we have to meet as a country and we have to be willing to take

difficult decisions that it involves. That is what the

government was elected to do in 2010 and that is what we were reelected

to do in 2015 and it is what what we will do. -- and no change in the

budget commitment to tackle homelessness with a record boost of

some hundred 50 million on top of the protection of the homeless

division grant from cells of the government has credentials and

protecting the vulnerable. My Honorable friend is right to

highlight that measure that was announced last week, this is a

government that is taking the issue of homelessness seriously and it is

an important set of policies that was announced last week. Given that

the Chancellor has the warning is all about the global cocktail of

risk that we learn from the but the statement that our growth forecast

is down as is our productivity which I think it is fast reaching, what

possible justification can the Minister offer given all of the

changes that have been made to the budget for retaining the substantial

clubs to capital gains tax which disproportionately benefits the

better off. We do not need it at this point. One of the importance

jobs that we do phase is improving productivity in this country. If we

want to do that, we want more investment. If we want more

investment would don't want high rates of tax that discourage

investment and cannot point out in terms of capital gain tax, the rate

is still higher than the one that we in 2010. Last week I met two

vigilance is fast constituents, one was unemployed and he has now have a

job. Another has disabilities and has told with a vessels agency. Both

of them have gone jobs. They have benefited hugely from the

conservatism which... Well my Honorable friend confirmed that this

will continue and that people like Mark and Luke will be held going for

it? I'm very grateful to my Honorable friend, he puts it well

and I am grateful for highlighting those examples, there is something

compassionate about having a society where there are a lot of jobs. I'm

pleased at the government we are delivering that time of economy. And

the chances speech last week he referred the ?20 million being given

and the southwest of England and when he said that he said that this

is proof that won the Southwest goes blue their voices are heard loudly.

This is all about the personal interests of that. Denied remind the

Honorable gentleman that there have been a number of city deals done

with authorities in the northeast of England, and, the truth is that

employment records, it is the case, employment records in the northeast

of England is extremely strong. There are many welcome measures for

my constituents. More the Minister comments on that and have a

government who listens when it is compared to Gordon Brown and his

refusal to reconsider the tax rate. My Honorable friend does remind me

of 2007 and 2008. There is a distinction between the two

governments whereas Gordon Brown doubled its tax rate on the lower

orders, we have a abolished tax for low honours. Thank you Mr Speaker,

for billion seems to have fallen out of the buses, can he confirm that

and when is the chance of going to get it and where is he finding the

money? I would say to the honour wasn't summoned, as he is worried

about black holes of the public finances he should have a word with

his own front bench. Does my right honourable friend agree that the

governments track record and tackling unemployment demonstrates

the commitment not just the enterprise but to improving chances

as well in life? The truth is that the government has taken steps to

improve the last chances of the British people, but it also helps in

the long term the chance of the British people to have public

finances under control. The Honorable Silverman agrees with the

ombudsman that the cuts to disabled people... ... Let's be clear about

the record of this government. Let's be clear, let's put it in context of

what this government has done as a consequence of the policy changes

that we have pursued, and will not be the case that the highest earning

20% will pay more than half of all taxes, that would not have had have

been if we started with the policies we inherited. The financial

secretary will notice today that the discipline has not lasted long. Mr

Speaker. They have spent more money. The transfer from ?2 million to

start the new Children's Hospital in Southampton was so greatly benefit

thousands of young people across the South. It has nothing to do with the

body politic that we are seeing in the chamber this afternoon. I'm

grateful to my Honorable friend. I would make this point that we can

only afford to take steps like that including properly funding our NHS

because we have a strong economy. A sound economy that is then delivered

by the government and by the Chancellor of the six years. Wheel

distances agree that we must control the debt. It should not be done on

the backs of the book. There are three that have been cut that will

come in 2019 and 2020. Corporation tax cuts, capital gains tax cut,

trekking tax, that he will he believed that we are all in this

together? I am pleased to hear that the ombudsman believes that we have

to get deficit and debt under control. But he will be aware that

an independent... Given what has happened will face the biggest

deficit and the rest of the world. Can the Minister confirmed what the

top right of income tax is today, with the tax rate for an the Labour

government and how many basic rate taxpayers have been taken out of

paying income tax altogether under the Conservatives? 45, 40, and about

for Emily and I think LAUGHTER. -- 4 million. Does the Minister agree

that it would of taken brokerage for the Chancellor to come here today

and that in a failing to show that courage, he has shown that he is not

fit in the future to leave the party. But it is the value of

courage, not just that failure but it is a discrepancy to the house

which renders us and capable of properly examining the budget

because we don't know how the Chancellor isn't upholding to meet

his fiscal targets. With the greatest respect to the ombudsman, I

think that is pompous nonsense. -- honourable gentleman. We will be

responsible for bait, the first time the Chancellor has done that in the

1990s. Thank you very much, the best ways to improve the lives chances of

those were able-bodied or disabled is to invest in education. Does the

Honorable member agreed that the 1.6 billion investment in the budget

will help the next generation get the best start in life? This was an

excellent present for an education, it was an excellent budget for the

next iteration, if we are going to have the prosperity and economic

security that this country once we are going to have a world class

education system, that's what the government as in the process of

delivering. Is it fair to make for billion worth of cuts to disabled

people to personal and independent payments when they are twice as

likely to live in poverty? At the same time, giving tax breaks and

Corporation and capital gains tax? There will be a statement on

personal independence payments either on this afternoon. The point

I would make to the Honorable Lady is that over the course of the last

six years we have seen a significant increase in real terms in terms of

vending on DLA and... We also need to ensure that we have a productive

economy credit wealth in different plays an eye makes no apologies for

us wanted to have a competitive system. One of the notable points of

this budget was that self-employed people got some help, and these can

often be the unsung hero of our community. They have been playing

such an important part in local business. Does the Minister agree

that by helping them, this government is just a missed

demonstrating and understands what is making the economy worked and

what won't benefit so many people. My little friend is right, this is a

government that is backing before millions self-employed people that

we have in this country. We are on the side of those who are going out

and taking risk and working for themselves and pretty well for the

British people. -- create things. Where is the Chancellor and why is

he not here to apologise and how would the full .4 billion black hole

be filled? -- 4.4 billion. This Chancellor has worked tirelessly to

turn the Bush economy around. He is continuing to do that. In terms of a

black hole can I point out that every single day, we hear proposals

from the party opposite, either to oppose some spending item, or to cut

some taxes, just borrowing, and barring more. Misses bigger this

very welcome budget for Cardiff is delivering the Cardiff city deal.

And in contrast to the government and Western democracy, businessmen

and businesswomen welcome to business rate relief and it is an

incredibly popular. When my right honourable Frank anchor as she

labours of the government to follow our lead and empowering businessmen

and women? I think if the Welsh assembly Government is going to

follow our lead it needs to change is position and it has operatives to

do that and a few weeks' time. Order! ! Statement, the Prime

Minister. Thank you Mr Speaker, what permission I would like to make a

statement on last weeks European Council was focus on the migration

prices affecting continental Europe. The biggest single cause has been

the war in Syria. We have seen huge growth in people coming to Southern

Europe from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and North Africa. Offices located by

the rapid growth of criminal networks of people smugglers. There

are over 8000 migrants fill arriving in Greece every week. So far, 10,000

have come this year. Of course, because the vice puzzles that is in

the European Union. Britain is not part of the Schengen open border

arrangements and we will not be joining. People cannot travel

through Greece or Italy, on what to constantly Europe and into Britain.

That will not change. It is in our national interest to help our

European partners deal effectively with this enormous and destabilising

shamans. We have argued for a consistent and clear approach for

from the start, and in the conflict in Syria, supporting the refugees in

the region, and securing Europe's borders. Taking refugees directly

from the camps and the neighbouring countries but not from Europe.

Cracking down on people smuggling, this

approach of this plan, the council agreed to stop migrants leaving

Turkey in the first place. To intercept those who do Levi the RNC

turning back their boats, and return back to Turkey does that make it to

Greece. There can be no guarantee of the success but if the plan is

properly and fully implemented it will be the best chance to make a

difference. For the first time we have a plan that breaks the business

model of the people smugglers, by breaking the link between getting in

a boat and getting settlement in Europe. Mr Speaker, I want to be

clear about what Britain is doing and what we are not doing as a

result of this plan. What we are doing is contributing our expertise

and our skilled officials to help with a large-scale operation. But

asylum experts and interpreters already working and agrees to help

them process individual cases. Britain stands more to support these

efforts. Above all what is needed, is a detailed plan to implement this

agreements and to ensure that all the offers of support are coming

from around Europe are properly coordinated. Are sure of the

additional money that will go to hell the refugees under those

agreements will come from our existing budget. Let me be clear

about what we are not doing, we want not give visa free access for Turks

coming to the UK. Schengen countries are planning to give visa free

access to text but because my not a part of Schengen were not banned by

the decision. We met on the system which is to maintain our own

borders. Second, the visa free access to Schengen countries will

not need a back door route to Britain. Visa free access only means

the right to visit, and does not mean a right to work or a right to

settle. Just because friends of the citizens can enjoy visa free travel

for Chavez to America does not mean that they can work that alone there.

This is not the Turco citizens their rights in the EU. A number of theory

and are in camps and Turkey will be presentable and Turkey will be

presentable into the Schengen countries of the EU. Again, that is

not applied to Britain. We have our resettlement programme and we are

delivering on it. We promised 8000 resettled here before Christmas and

that is what we were delivered. The other countries agreed to two

schemes, one to relocate the people in the EU up by the time of last

December council only 208 people had been relocated, and the second 200

voluntary resettlement schemes from outside the EU, but by the end of

last year, the 483 refugees have been resettled to out of the seven

countries. We said we would do and we are doing it. Britain has given

more money to support his and the countries hosting them than any

other European country. Indeed, we are doing more than any other

country in the world, other than the United States bending over ?1

billion so far with another ?1.2 billion place we are fulfilling our

moral responsibility of the nation. Turning to the central

Mediterranean, the EU naval operation we established last summer

has had some success was over 90 vessels destroyed and more than 50

smugglers arrested. What is a splendid it is a government in Libya

that we can work with. So that we can co-operate and turn back the

bolts and stop the smugglers. There is a new prime minister and a

government that we have recognise. These are early days but we must do

what we can to make this work, that is why this Council I brought to the

other leaders. Mr Speaker, turning to other matters I took the

opportunity to deal with a lot issue of how to back the rate of sanitary

products. We have had some EU ride rules in order to make the single

market for it but the system has been far too flexible and has caused

frustration. We said a change them as well be dead. The European

commission will produce a proposal. This is an important breakthrough

and dimming fabrics and will be able to have a zero rates and that it

will be the end of the tampon fax. And on this basis, the government

will be accepting both amendments on the finance Bill tomorrow night. My

right honourable friend, the Member for it strengthened and brains but

almost a decade for welfare reform and improving peoples lives chances,

he has been the last six years implementing those policies and

government. In that time we have seen nearly half a million fewer

children living and households over a million flu or people aren't out

of urban affairs and nearly two million more people and work, and in

spite of having the take of the clothes on the deficit, child

poverty, inequality all down. Am I right honourable friend contributed

an enormous amount of the work of government and he can be proud of

what he has achieved. Mr Speaker, let me say this, this government

will continue to give the highest priority to improving the lives

chances of the poorest in our country. We will continue to reform

our schools, we will continue to find childcare and great job, he

will carry on cutting taxes for the loan was paid, and the last

parliament beats up for a million of the lowest pay people out of income

tax altogether and I further rises will take many many more house as

well. Combined with the zoo will go on with our plan to rebuild states

and help those with mental health conditions.

To extend our troubled families programme and to reform our prisons,

and societal discrimination for those whose lives chances suffer,

because of the colour of their skin. Mr Speaker, in two weeks' time, we

will introduce the first ever national living wage giving a pay

rise to the poorest people in our country. All of this is driven by a

deeply held conviction that everyone in Britain should have the chance to

make the most of their lives, and Mr Speaker let me add this, none of

this would be possible if it was not for the actions of government the

work of the Honorable friend the Chancellor and turning our economy

around. We can only improve life chances if our economy is secure and

strong. You end up having to raise taxes without finances and make

deeper cuts and bending. You don't get more opposite to that way you

get less. And we know that when that happens, and is working people that

suffer as we saw and labours recession. We must continue to cut

the deficit, control the cost of welfare and live with our means. We

must not burden our children and grandchildren with debt that we do

not have the courage to pay off ourselves. So securing our economy,

extending opportunity, we will continue with this approach in full,

because we are a modern and compassionate one nation

conservative government and I commend the statements of the house

by! Thank you Mr Speaker and I said that

I would like to thank the prime minister for an advance copy of half

of his statement. In I can deal with it in order, first of all Mr

Speaker, the refugee crisis that Europe faces, at the present time is

the largest since the end of the world -- Second World War. There are

more misplaced people around the world than there have ever been.

Thousands of people have died making perilous journeys across the

Mediterranean and other places around the world, we have a duty as

an advance democratic civilized nation to reach out, the hand of

humanity, support, and friendship to people going to the most disastrous

time of their lives. I think we should also recognise, that it has

been a disproportionate burden placed on neighbouring countries, to

Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon, they have accepted a number of refugees

as has Turkey, and the European countries of Italy and Greece as

boarder countries have done far more than anybody else and a Germany and

Sweden have taken a very large number of asylum seekers. There has

not been an imbalance response all across Europe. I would like to ask

the Prime Minister if he had had a chance to read the statement made by

Amnesty International at the weekend after the agreement was reached. And

missed the normally noted for their very cautious view of words and very

careful way and which they describe things. They are a overnight patient

dedicated to human rights and the rule of law. I quote from the

statement that they made, guarantees respect for international law are

incompatible with the return to Turkey of all irregular migrants

arriving on Greek Island as of Sunday, Turkey is not a state budget

for refugees and migrants, and the return process for Dick did on it

being sold will be flawed and illegal and it goes on to register

for the conference. I asked the Prime Minister to respond very

carefully to the points that are being put by Amnesty International.

Will he also confirmed that priesthood and receive asylum

seekers coming from Turkey, they will all be end interviewed and

we'll all have access to interpreters, they will all have

access to a right of a hearing and a right of appeal, even when they're

in the done by officials that have come by other countries on behalf of

the European Union. Secondly, those that will return to Turkey will also

have similar rights in Turkey, and that they will in turn be properly

treated because he must be very well aware of the deep concerns many

people have of the recent events in Turkey, particularly the

imprisonment of journalists who have attempted to stick out on a number

of issues. Clearly, the issue of number of the people of people

seeking asylum in Europe is heavily bound up with the wars that have

taken place and indeed take place still. He referred to the need for a

political settlement in the Syria and Libya. In that sense he is quite

right, could he give us some information on progress that may

have been made toward bringing about a political settlement in the area

which will enable peoples were to return to their homes, will enable

them to live safe and secure lives? Likewise, the situation and Libya is

equally perilous for many people particularly those in unsecured

refugee camps. He will be aware that many those who seek asylum in other

countries make as I said perilous journeys, they also end up an

refugee camps with very limited facilities, despite the great work

by volunteers, I visited the camps and Calais and Dunkirk which are an

appalling situation, and they are in a very prolific situation. They are

all humans to whom we must reach out and hand of friendship of support. I

recognise that the Buddhist government has paid a great deal of

money through support of refugee camps and refugees around the world.

I've recognise the work that the world Navy has done and plucking

people from the seat in saving them from drowning in the ocean, I

recognise those things, but, the Prime Minister still things to be

seen in the next that and the narrative that printable only accept

20,000 refugees over the next four years, and they will be brought from

Camp in the region rather of the problems faced by many of those

refugees who are travelling across Europe at the present time and stop.

Can we not for once, please Prime Minister for want co-operate with

every other European countries on providing aid European wide response

to the crisis that is engulfing the lives of so many people rather than

trying to avoid but I believe to be our responsibilities in this

respect. Mr Speaker, when the Prime Minister gave me his advance copy of

about half of the statement, he went on to talk about the sanitary

products and some other issues and then delivered a much longer speech

on many other things. Can I say first of all, I think the house

should pay great tribute to my friend the Member for dues vary for

the work that she has done in trying to eliminate this unfair tax. I

think the Prime minister, he has come here today the Secretary of

State for Work and Pensions this year, every other cabinet minister

is here, what ever has happened to the Chancellor? Where is he today?

Because it could he not instead of covering up for his friends, ask him

if he would be kind enough to come along to the house and explain why

for the first time in my memory in Parliament, a government budget has

followed up when in two days of his delivery, and there is an enormous

hole in it and the enormous hole is brought about by possibly a

temporary retreat on the issue of personal independence payments but,

can he guarantee as there will be no further cuts in the DWT budgets and

more people with disabilities facing more cuts as the euros goals on or

that he instead tell us why he is still defending a budget that has an

equality at its core, that has impact on the disabled and the pores

in our country at its core, and gives tactilely to the riches and

the big corporations and this country? The budget has a big hole

in it and it is up to the Prime Minister to persuade his friend the

Chancellor to either come here and explain how he's going to fill the

hole or perhaps he should consider his position and look for something

else to do because clearly he has not been very successful at

producing a balanced budget in the interest of everyone and this

country particularly those with Let me thank the honourable

gentleman for his response. First of all on the refugee issue, he says we

have a duty to help and he is right, we have helped and spent billions of

pounds supporting refugees in refugee camp, more than any other

European country. The Royal Navy has helped a huge measure. Picking

people out of the C and saving lives. We are taking 20,000 refugees

from the neighbouring countries and when you look at the figures, what

other European countries have done, we have put in place that planned

and delivered a far faster than many other and most other countries. The

second point he raised was about Amnesty International. He is

absolutely right that we must in this process respect international

law and the role of the NHC are and the agreement with Turkey made that

clear. But I do not think it is right to say that Turkey is an

unsafe country for Syria and refugees. I think that is like

insulting to the Turks who are currently hosting to .6 million

people who have fled Syria. So what is going to happen is those people

who do not apply for asylum will be returned to Jordi immediately. Those

who do will go through a rapid process, but with all the proper

procedures in place, and as the agreement says, all migrants will be

returned to Turkey because it it is a sick country for refugees. For

anyone it is unsafe for, then of course that is different. I would

say to him he is missing the point. Which is, it sounds very

compassionate to say to refugees, keep coming, you can comment. But

you are encouraging people to make a perilous journey where so many have

lost their lives. It is actually a more compassionate thing to make

sure you have firm borders and proper processes and you support the

refugees in the countries that they are in. We should be encouraging --

should not be encouraging more people to travel. About the Syria

peace process, I can say that the cease-fire is holding better than I

think people expected, as a result the talks are under way still and we

are hopeful of progress but it will be a slow and difficult process. In

Libya, there is a new prime minister, the Foreign Secretary said

to him over the weekend they will give every support that we can for

the reasons that he gives. He asked questions about Calais. Let me say

this to him, of course everybody is disturbed by the pictures of what

happens in Calais, in those camps, but there is a very simple answer

for those people which is that France is a safe country. If they

want asylum, they should apply for asylum in France. If there are

children in those camps, you have -- who have direct family in Britain,

they can join their family in Britain. We should not be doing

anything to discourage people from taking that correct step. In terms

of his question about whether we will take people from inside Europe,

I do not think that is the right answer. I would argue that the

approach the home Secretary and I set out almost a year ago of

tackling this problem upstream concentrating on borders, taking

migrants from, taking asylum seekers from refugee camps, is a better

approach than most countries in Europe can see the merit of. He

asked if there is a European plan and yes, there is, we are one of the

more important countries there at this counsel arguing to get this

deal done and implemented properly because while it has many

imperfections, it is our best hope of trying to stem this tied of

people coming toward Europe and the misery that is causing and bringing.

On the issue of the tampon tax, I should pay tribute to the honourable

member as well for the hard work done. I am delighted we now have

this proposal coming forward. In terms of the Chancellor of the

Exchequer, he will be in the House tomorrow winding up the budget

debate. You have the first Lord of the Treasury today, you're going to

have the second Lord of the Treasury tomorrow, and when it comes to holes

in the budget, we can perhaps hear from the lords that set upset

because they left us the biggest black call there ever was. When I

became Prime Minister, we had an 11% budget deficit, that was the biggest

budget deficit anywhere and as for the budget, let me remind them, this

budget increased funding for our schools. This budget took more

low-paid people out of income tax, this budget help hard-working

people. This budget help the poorest in our country to say Demarco safe,

this backs small business and that is why it'll strengthen our economy

and make sure we have a fairer society. The fifth point of the

Council conclusions is that the EU reiterates that it expects Turkey to

respect the high standards when it comes to democracy, rule of law,

respect the fundamental freedoms including freedom of expression. Any

reference to this was absent from the accompanying EU - Turkey

statement. How many Kurds have to be killed by the Turkish security

forces before we no longer regard Turkey as a first country of asylum

or safer third country, not least for Syrian Kurds? First of all he is

right that their conclusions mentioned of commitment and

democracy and freedom of speech and the freedom of speech Doctor Price,

that was spelled out in even more detail, mentioning the newspaper

that has faced difficulties. All European countries including this

one raise this issue at every available opportunity. The point I

would make is that if you are a Syria and seeking refuge, Turkey has

been a safe place for those serious and we should pay tribute to Turkey

for looking after to .6 million of those people but we should also make

the point that anyone who does genuinely based persecution and

Turkey will be ale to take that claim to their asylum claim. Thank

you very much and may I think the prime minister as well for the

advanced statement of the first tab of the statement and that is a

statement that the European Union began with the EU - Turkey joint

action plan. The statement I want to say about Turkey, Greece, refugees

from Syria and elsewhere impact at the management of the sure zone

countries, and the prime minister's statement I looked at 12 think the

UK is not going to do. So given the projection of refugee numbers for

this year, what will it take for the UK to review its 20,000 limit on

accepting refugees? With the attempts to change and close the

West Balkan route for the refugees, can the premise or update us what

this will mean for attempted crossings from Libya? Last week in

prime minister's questions I asked about UK plans to send troops to

Libya. The Prime Minister chose his words very carefully. He said and I

quote "He had no plans to send conventional forces to Libya" with

the prime minister acknowledged that he has a policy of neither

confirming nor denying the presence of special forces. Willie also

confirm that operations conducted by special forces are not subject to

parliamentary oversight by either this intelligence or security

ministry or the defence select committee. On VAT and sanitary

products, we very much welcome this agreement. It would be egregious of

the Prime Minister to thank my colleague for Glasgow Central, who

is a first member of this house to table amendments to the finance Bill

and tribute to be paid to all members across as House across all

parties for this welcome change. The second half of the Prime minister's

statement on the Civil War within the government. Will the Prime

Minister confirm that he, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the

Secretary of State for Scotland, and his whole cabinet, agreed last week

to cut support for the disabled by four points ?3 billion while at the

same time adding a tax cut to the very wealthy. I repeatedly asked the

Prime Minister about the devastating impact of benefit cuts to the most

vulnerable, including the disabled and ill, who will go on many, sadly,

tragically, to take their own lives. Does the Prime Minister understand

that people watching the ongoing fallout in the conservative party

are totally horrified that more time is spent talking about the jobs of

Tory ministers then the impact that is damaging policies on the weakest

in society? First of all, I say to the right honourable gentleman,

enter the 20,000 what we have said and let me repeat again is that we

are looking at the issue of the child migrants and those we can help

more of, we took 3000 in last year. Of the 20,000 we expect, many are

expected to be children and we are working with the UNHCR and we're

looking at children within the region and have talked about

potentially in the hundreds rather than thousands and my right

honourable rent is examining that. On the West Balkan route, I am not

surprised that countries have decided to erect borders because

they have been very concerned about the huge flow of people through that

route. But obviously those in the Schengen countries and others of a

whole to secure the borders is better and that is what we are

helping with. I think it has particular locations are Libya,

those migrants have been coming through Malta and Italy but we need

to address that. On special forces, let me confirm the long-standing

policy of all governments have exactly the same approach and we

have not changed that at all. On sanitary products I'm very happy to

pay tribute to the Member for Glasgow Central and apologise for

missing them out. On this disability, I am saying we're not

going ahead with the changes that were put forward, but what we are

going ahead with is the situation, when I was Prime Minister first, we

spelled so much on disability benefits and at the end of this

Parliament we are spending over 46 billion, which is a real terms

increase of over 4 billion. What we did in that budget was also help

take the low-paid people after tax and assist in many ways. That is why

it was a good budget, we have taken the right decisions with that. In

addition to the refugees we are taking from the camps, each year

thousands of people enter this country irregularly and by other

means from North Africa and the Middle East seeking asylum and many

are granted. Those numbers are increasing. Does the Prime Minister

therefore agree with me that it is a complete mistake to regard the

current crisis over migration as somehow something apart from the

United Kingdom, if only we were not in the European Union and that

actually it is in the British incest to play and continue playing --

interest. To play a role in these European Council discussions to

achieve a solution to external European border and how we will deal

with genuine migrants in civilized conditions and returned those who

have no claim to come. And will continued to commit to the European

effort, the Navy, the aid money, the resources we are giving, to these...

-- diplomatic efforts? I thank my friend for his honourable remarks.

Whether we're in the European Union or out of it, there is still a

migration crisis the continent of Europe and that does have knock on

effects to us. The more people that come, the more people who end up

that Calle, and worsen the problem we have. I would argue that we have

the best of both worlds because we are sad around the table trying to

solve this problem, and I think good progress has been made, but because

we are not in Schengen or these resettlement schemes, we keep our

own decisions by borders and visas and all the rest of it, but clearly

it does benefit us to co-operate so we should continue to do that and

continue to recognise that Britain could bring its experience there in

helping our friends in Greece who face a real crisis now in their

country and they deserve our assistance and help. Can I think the

Prime Minister for his statement and his somewhat revised and link the

assessment of the merit to the right honourable member. Let's be clear

though, the Turkey- EU deal is a result of failure by European

leaders including our own Prime Minister to develop safe,

sustainable, and humane routes for refugees who are fleeing for their

lives. It is an operable, may well be illegal, and has a public image

of protecting human lives. Given the Prime Minister is today painting the

stress of he is being a compassionate conservative, will he

show some compassion for the 43,000 people currently stuck in Greece,

including 20,000 children, and on the century for some of them, in

particular those incredibly vulnerable unaccompanied children

and families with babies was white I have to say I profoundly disagree

with the right honourable gentleman. The idea that if we had found safe

Routes for people to come to Europe, then somehow the whole people

smuggling, criminal games, and amassed him and the people would

have come to an end is a complete and utter nonsense. And yet you have

to have some hard borders. A country is responsible for having its

borders and if you're the expert a country to the European Union you

are particularly responsible for your border. That combination of

harder border controls, but compassion and helping refugees in

the region, that is the answer. We play our part by putting in our

money and taking the 20,000 refugees, but the idea that you open

up safe Routes and the problem would be solved is complete nonsense.

Given the extraordinary difficulties that have occurred with regard to

the charter of fundamental rights and the human rights and asylum

laws, how does my right honourable friend proposed that the Turkey deal

will be legally and politically enforceable? It is the view of the

lead advisor to the European Council that what is being proposed is

legal. Is it difficult to achieve? Yes it is because you have to

consider each case individually. But is it is impossible if you deck

signalling Turkey as a safe country for refugees to return there? And

yes it is possible. I would say if you look at problems we have had

with mass movements of people over years, you have to have a set of

nations that break the line between getting in a boat and getting

settled. Until you do that you are basically unable to deal the crisis.

That is what Europe has now set out to do and we shouldn't encourage

them in that goal. -- should encourage them. I agree that

progress has been made but it has come at a cost. Turkey will be

getting 3 billion euros and they asked for another three bearing

euros by the end of 2018. Greece on the other hand, which is the

process, house, and return these migrants have not been given any

additional resources. Does he agree with me that what we need to do next

is to take preventative action to stop the criminal gangs exploiting

those migrants who come now from different routes? I am grateful to

what the honourable gentleman says. I would argue, first of all the

money that is going to Turkey is not money for Turkey it is money for

Syrian refugees in Turkey and for them to make sure they are properly

looked after. We have given support to Greece, that is a European

programme to help, but above all Greece needs support from experts,

translators, asylum expertise, which all of the main countries in Europe

are now offering to provide, and what is required is a plan to make

sure they get what they need. Any help in kind would be probably more

useful for firming up the Greeks system than just giving the money.

Pressure on time requires brevity. In my experience, unfailingly

represented. Given the obvious difficulty in unifying the varying

economies and societies of the current EU, why is now a good time

to accelerate possible Turkish membership? I think the issue here

is there is no, it is not remotely on the cards for this to happen for

many years to come. Every country has a veto at every stage, including

this country. The French for instance has said they will hold a

referendum on Turkish membership and 75% of the French public do not want

Turkey to join. Of the process of applying and opening these chapters

and going through things like press freedom and human rights,

independence of the judiciary and so much, so such. It has been a good

process and that is how we should see it. Since the Bloomberg speech,

the Prime Minister hold European strategy has been trying to manage

the divisions in his own party on this issue. In the recent days,

could you update the House on how that is going? What I would say to

the right of -- right honourable gentleman who speaks a lot of sense

about this issue, this country has to make a decision. It is not just

one political party or the other who has people on both sides of this

argument. The country, I think it is time for us to have this debate, to

look at the advantages of staying and the risks on both sides and to

make a decision. I am very clear about what the decision should be,

but you cannot hold a country inside an organisation against its will. I

think it is time again to put that question to the

British people. I will campaign enthusiastically for remaining, not

least of these the agreements I have achieved, but it is for others to

set their arguments. But for Democrats in this House of Commons,

we should not be frightened by the will of the people. Has my right

honourable friend noticed that the three and a half billion pound

savings that are for benefits of disabled people that the Chancellor

needed to find is not exactly equal to the planned increase since his

previous budget and our EU contributions over this Parliament?

Given his success in persuading our partners to be flexible over VAT,

could he now challenge them, most of Hume are not seeing any increase in

contributions, to forgo our increase since the British people would not

take kindly to the idea that we must cut benefits to vulnerable people in

order to hand over every penny to the EU? I respectfully disagree with

my right honourable friend about this fundamental European issue. I

make the point that the ?46 billion we spend on disability benefits is

many times more than anything we give to the European Union and

indeed, few think about it in tact, every pound paid in tax, a little

over 1p goes to the EU in terms of contribution. We are on different

sides of the argument, I believe that penny in every pound gets us

the trade and investment and cooperation we need. He takes a

different view but I am sure will have a civilized argument about it.

The one thing I would say is that because of the budget agreement I

reached in the last Parliament, our contributions are much lower than

they otherwise would have been. We were falling -- we have a falling EU

budget rather than a rising one and that is because of this government

and House of Commons. The EU- Turkey deal will do nothing to help the

26,000 children, child refugees, who are already alone in Europe. I met a

12-year-old in Calais this morning with no one to look after them. If

the House of Lords both this evening to support the amendment to help

3000 child refugees, will he drop his opposition and support children

as we did with the candour transport so many decades ago, that itself

helped rescue the life of that child? First of all we do not

support that amendment because we think it is right to take additional

children, have just said in another answer, to take additional children

above 20,000 stop to take them from the region and do it by working with

UNHCR. I think the unfairness of I might say of comparing Child

migrants in Europe with the candour transport is of course, countries

like France and Germany and Italy, these are safe countries. These are

countries where anyone who claims asylum, if they have family in

Britain, they are able to come to Britain. So I do not think it is a

fair comparison. All of us on this side of the House were delighted to

hear the Prime Minister reaffirmed with vigour and confidence his

determination to continue as a great reforming government with the

successful central themes of his administration. But will he review

whether or not there is a need to add to the deployment of... And

perhaps add other vessels in support? I think they're very well

may be a need to do so because their two operations under way. A Nato

operation and frankly we want that operation to do more, it is not the

moment sufficiently in Turkish waters able to work with the Turkish

Coast Guard, sending back boats to Turkey, we want that to happen.

There is also operations of you in the central Mediterranean where you

have these boats, but as the weather improves I am concerned that the

central Mediterranean room will open up again and that is why I held the

meeting with the other prime ministers and presidents to say we

all have to put more resources then, recognising that we cannot let this

route open up just as we sort out or hope to sort out the others. The

Lithuanian president has described the EU- Turkey deal as being on the

edge of international law. Does the Prime Minister agree with that

assessment and does he accept that from June of this year, from the

English Channel to the Syria border, it will be a visa free zone across

all of Europe? What international security questions does that pose

for the United Kingdom and its borders? First of all on what the

president was saying, we are very clear that this deal must be

compliant with international law and international rules and that is

exactly what the European commission and Council and all the countries

helping Greece make sure is going to happen. The key thing is, if Turkey

is a safe country for Syrian refugees, then it should be possible

to return Syrian refugees in Turkey because they should be applying for

asylum there rather than going on with their journey. On the second

issue you raised? If the rest of the EU gives right... It is not a right

to settle does not in any way change the rest to rest to come to the UK,

so I think there is a lot of scaremongering going on about this

issue because we're not changing our or proposals one bit. Does the Prime

Minister share my concern at the study Islamization of Turkish

society by its government, does he share my surprise that Turkey is now

so confident that it can't stop the votes coming when it has not been

able to in the past. -- boats. And does he share my fear that the mass

migration into Europe will fuel the rise of the far right neo-Nazi

parties in those EU countries that were foolish enough to get rid of

their national borders? I am in the happy position to be able to agree

with my right honourable friend on all of those measures. As someone

who's spent time in Turkey as a student, I think it is secularism

and its believe in wanting to become more like a Western democracy is one

of its strengths and we should encourage it. I also agree with them

that countries that do not control their borders do risk the rise of

unsavoury elements and that is why it is important we maintain our

borders. Obviously when it comes to this issue on wanting to return

migrants to Turkey, it is very important that Turkey is and remains

a safe country but that it is today. The Prime Minister says he is a

compassionate conservative, leading a one nation government. So how does

he feel when a former leader of his party, a member of his cabinet for

six years, says this simply is not true? Obviously we were not closely

together for the last six years and I am proud of the things we have

done together because it is is this government has enlisted almost for

me people out of the government income tax. It is seen an increase

in disability benefit and it is thanks to the hard work of the right

honourable member, because of the growing economy and the changes to

welfare, we have thing to .4 million people get work and our country. And

behind the statistics, the human beings are able to put food on a

table and have a better life for their families because of the work

we have done together. I am sad that he has left the government but I can

guarantee the work on being a compassionate conservative

government will continue. Given the nature of the terrorist threat, does

my right honourable friend not agree with me how important it is that the

European countries intelligence and security agencies operate fully with

hours and defeating ices and that it is absurd to suggest that membership

of the EU is likely to result in tariffs and tax on the United

Kingdom? It is important that our indices were together and on the

whole, that will be on a bilateral basis, but it is worth understanding

that in the modern European Union, there are a series of mechanisms

about criminal records, about border information, about watch lists,

passenger name records, all of which help to keep us safer than we would

otherwise have been. I want to be completely fair, if we left the

European Union, you could try to negotiate your way back into those

things, but it would take time, and it does beg the question that if you

want to get back into them, why are you getting out of them?

With the Prime Minister now justify the nearly ?3 billion given away in

capital gains to the wealthy? I think it is right to cut capital

gains tax because they want an enterprising economy watch the doors

want to get out there set up businesses create wealthy great jobs

and generate tax revenue to pay for the health service and the schools

we want for our country, and note that the capital gains tax rate at

20% will actually be a little bit higher than what it was in last

government! We are not cutting it for carried interest we will not

have that absurd interest -- situation when he was a government,

the people of the city were paying the -- less tax than people playing

their -- cleaning offices my right honourable gentleman friend, that

the accession of Turkey was a very long way off. Is this uncertainty

what is staying in books like was the white --? There is a veto by

every country at every stage. The situation as I see it with those

countries and I mentioned France, has no process in this debate that

we are having about Europe, unfortunately we are in opposite

sides of the debate, but it will be civilized, I want to try to get rid

of any of the potential -- any bit have the potential argument with

what is going to happen rather than things that will not happen. There

is merit in seek asylum seekers. They will have serious health

problems sometimes lifelong. Would you compensate those that seek

asylum in the interests of the asylum seekers in their community,

will you help the asylum seekers throughout the country and those in

his house comic of the truth these last year and how many would you

welcome this year? First of all, I think that the Honorable judgement

is right that by selecting the 20,000 from the refugee camps the

organised agency are disabilities disabilities would can help with in

a civilized country like United Kingdom. You have the money here, in

terms of my own constituency and families, I don't know the number

off the top of my head, but I agree with him that we want authorities to

come forward and that's where my honourable friend is working so hard

for. I'm delighted to hear that the Prime Minister is committed to

running a one nation Conservative Party, which is what the country

voted for only last May. On the issue of refugees, he made it

increasingly clear that this terrible crisis can only be solved

by collective action at the European level, will he commit that the

British Government plays a leading and instructing role in this facing

crisis? I think right honourable friend for what he says the scale of

the challenge is so great, but the Greek border needs to be harder and

more efficiently run, that requires assistance from other countries. In

my view, military assets and Nato assets in the Mediterranean, other

assets will help civilian authorities where it may, printing

authorities to bring a lot of experience to this as written's

leading military power and had to deal with asylum applications and

processes and all the complicated legalities on every front stop light

this is on the Tim context, this is a great victory, and I'm sure the

whole House will congratulate who has been dish petitioned this. Can

the Prime Minister set out that the agreement tomorrow, but the finance

Bill will pass to the House before the referendum in June, will he

pledged that vital funding for women for services was provided will

continue? Mr Speaker, I hope that the date we can set this to history?

Diet once again page a bit to the Honorable Lady with that new

epithet, I think that will live on for many years to come. I'd like to

pay tribute to this Honorable Lady with the amendment in terms of the

timing I'm sure it was discussed and debated in the debate yesterday, all

I can save for my part is explaining some of getting over the language

barriers on sanitary products it will take me a while. I would call

on her but she is not standing so I cannot. The Prime Minister has

reiterated his support for the European Union, he has said there is

no support for the... What assessment has he made on migration

would be from Turkey and in the long term if they were to join, and any

additional costs for the youth UK taxpayer is he in favour of their

access to the EU at any price of the UK taxpayer? What I would say to my

Honorable friend, there is no remote prospect of this happening so he

doesn't have to worry about it in terms of future sessions to the EU,

will be as set out in the manifesto was a much tougher approach that we

believe countries that do join the EU, should get to the position of

being much closer entrance of GDP kappa to the current level the big

migrations... Because no country can get into the EU, with out all

existing members, it is something we and the other countries have to be

tell. On these arrangements, we have to absolutely insist on them. Thank

you Mr Speaker, of the tampon on tax last year, the treasure was quite

dismissive site like to commend -- come and the government on this

particular issue. The women of this country put much pressure on this

country to help with this important issue. Is anything you'd like to

help implement? I am grateful for the Honorable Lady's work on this to

help. I think she will find that other European countries of course

there is huge pressure on other countries to explain their own taxon

sanitary products, of course with Ireland leading the way. In terms of

the manifesto, with we have an independent Scotland we want the

text... Thank you Mr Speaker. May I welcome my right honourable friend

who is a widely respected on these benches. Would he agree with me,

that two of the greatest three reforms that he leads, are restoring

the fiscal rectitude and can heed therefore continue with both

equally? I wholeheartedly agree with my Honorable friend, and this does

go to the point with a welfare cap, controlled very easily with

departmental spending is up by 60% under the last government. That is

money you cannot spend on hospitals, schools, bridal services. -- vital.

This is a vital component of a one nation government. Had powerful

testimony who she escaped from kidnap from the -- -- Daesh Daesh.

Will the race of the government in both Iraq and Turkey will he raise

that question? We will do more to help the LCDs which is why we are in

terms of what the secretary said the government policy figures under

previous governments that genocide is under a legal opinion very

despite a legal... I want to bore my colleagues are

normally call everyone, I fear it will almost certainly not be

possible today. Brevity will help however. At the end of the Prime

minister's remarks, he made his statement to the state of

generations. Does my Honorable friend that this is a classic

example of a one nation conservatism. Given that is not only

improved homes for those of lifting our cities, but supplied new homes

for top buyers? My Honorable friend is absolutely right. The aim here

should be to remove all barriers there anyway of people progressing

and making the most of their lives. That is regenerating estates, they

can play a huge part in addressing the shortage of childcare places

like schools, mental health issues, unblocking barriers will lead to

success. Will be Prime Minister did his assurance in view of the

financial mess that is being created with this budget, that this will be

the Chancellor of Exchequer last budget? Here that aid, only cats

have nine lives? No. Is a income at those who accept the budget cuts, to

tell us how they produce the deficit? But Honorable friend is

absolutely right there are decisions you have to take, when you are

facing a level of... We still need to get this country back to us there

plus I would argue that this is not some artificial target you have to

make sure. You're putting aside money for a rainy day, that is what

this is all about. It does involve difficult decisions you don't always

get that right, but it is very important you stick to the long-term

economic plan of getting this country back from back. He mentioned

the work of his former Secretary of State, that is current chancellor,

so can he tell us if he is ruling out any further negotiation with the

EU on benefits of spending, just how to see intend to fix the big holes

in the budget that was announced this week and? What you see in the

budget is good be a good package of measures, that will get the company

back to work, will support our schools. The Jester will be sure to

our winding up the budget debate, and a new forecast will be produced

in all these issues will be addressed. Normally, on everything

he says I almost don't agree with everything, but, I'm now confused by

the answers given. The government says that it lasts -- lacks

enthusiastically Turkey's ascension to the EU. Can it get these facts

right? We do believe in free movement, we do want to stay in the

EU. The answer is no, because Turkey is in a part of the EU. In this

debate, which I know will get very passionate, people want to raise

potential concerns and worries in order to support their argument. But

I have to say in terms of Turkey being a member of the EU, this is

not remotely a prospect. If every country has a B2 -- vetoed... Let us

talk about in the debate what will happen, not what will not happen. We

stay in a reformed European Union would keep our borders, we keep our

right to set our own asylums and immigration policies. We can stop

any what we want to at our borders. Yes we do believe in the free

movement of people, as other Europeans as well. It is not a

qualified right now. If you come here, kept by the job, get

unemployment benefits, get sent home after six months, don't ask us to

our welfare system, ironically if we were to eat leaves the EU and take

up a Norway style position, no one would have that welfare

restrictions. Let us set out what can happen versus what will not

happen. With the Civil War, the prime

Minister says it is better to keep refugees in the region, they look at

us and they close their borders. They have taken 4 million refugees

can be province or tell the House with their European native allies of

the cease-fire in Syria. Have the violations been reported, and what

is the timetable to move toward the peace and democratic elections in

Syria to allow those refugees to return home? Lots of customs there

-- questions there. I can't pay and -- paint an entirely rosy picture

but it can be better than people expected. The peace talks are under

way onto Lebanon had taken a huge number of refugees of course the

country. The neighbouring countries are under obligation to fulfil those

obligations. We are helping with a massive aid programme, but we are

also helping the Lebanese forces. They are having considerable success

in making sure they keep Daesh out of their own country. The home

affairs select committee visited there to see if the work with the

police forces... They told as 90% of the asylum-seekers were thought to

use human traffickers to reach the EU. We need to break these criminal

gangs to stop them profiting from human tragedy? My Honorable friend

is absolutely right and I think already the action we're starting to

the people traffickers some of their markers are -- markets are becoming

more difficult to operate in their costs are going up. The national

crime agency, our European partners we are putting them of business. On

the best aspect of his statement, can I say to the Prime Minister not

once today as he shown understanding of why there was such a public

outcry throughout the country over the government's intention to help

the most honourable in our country. I do say he is becoming increased

increasingly uncertain. We have spent 42 billion on disabilities.

They'll go up to 46 billion by the end of this Parliament. We have

spent more on this. More under every year under this government under

then under a Labour government. He is cascading his own party. Now I've

call for consider brevity. What about other native members in terms

of stopping the file people trafficking trade from serious? We

are having good decides -- discussion were still having me to

be able to do more I would like Nader ships to be able to spend more

time in Turkish territory. -- Nato. Because he is right to say that the

children in Calais cannot puppeteer, but the 150 take charge request

issued by the French government, could be Prime Minister look at this

and bring forward proposals to get the process working, for any more

children suffer anymore over there? I've looked at this with the French

president, if you look at asylum with a look at the documents. In

congratulation with the ships company, to my right honourable

friend in particular medical team whose work extraordinary...

Trigger-happy to right honourable friend that the huge privilege going

to board one of the ships in Malta taken apart helping people pick up.

They save literally thousands of lives whether the medic teams, the

Marines, what are his is the personnel. The prime ministers

tagging on a recent days who unsuccessfully tried to explain the

own tragedies does the Prime Minister except with the revelation

of the Chancellor doesn't care about moral people of the tour emote vote

amongst them the compassionate conservatives... If I come to those

and not I think that would be right when it comes to, the people costing

their votes -- casting was aboard the voting people, we want to create

jobs cutting taxes, reforming welfare, we are improving schools,

we are investing our country and make an economy stronger, is a fair.

Did not at the British public policy of taking refugees from British

camps, there are no position to take position, it is absolutely right

thing to do. My Honorable friend is absolutely right. If fighting

resumes in Styria what is our plan? -- Styria we will combat -- --

Daesh. We'll sport a transitional government into without moderate in

opinion in it whenever you were -- unite the country. With the Prime

Minister agree with me that the weakness of those who are

criticising the agreement between the EU and Turkey would they say the

opposition of the leader today as they has significantly failed to

present a credible alternative to those arrangements. Surely in the

British public arrangements will surely make sensible arrangements

with Turkey to make sure the migrant stomach a perilous journey will omit

attending our own borders? A grip my right honourable friend I do believe

we will get the best of both worlds, if we hadn't been there, what would

difference would we have make? I think the European Union, will

continue for longer with the rather borderless approach, the relocating

migrants around different but countries which had failed. The

approach is more about looking upstream, supported the camps,

finding the funding for that, breaking the link between getting

settlement. The home Secretary has been after meeting after meeting.

This woman proud woman of two disabled signs she rang me white

sheet wise at people like us? Can the Prime Minister rule out, the

chief Association minister said today other any further cuts to not

support disabled in the sprawling? We've increased the number --

money... We have set out in our manifesto of the changes we need to

make to get the welfare budget under control. We have made those changes.

I think my right honourable friend for the sense of the way that he or

she with the can I ask my right honourable friend to ensure that

local authorities and the EU such such of these places in that

district Council are properly resourced and financed to welcome

the refugees? I believe they are properly resourced, because of the

different money that is available in the ongoing sport been given. But I

have encouraged local causes to give families coming here to want to go

home, will be hard-working, contributing to our communities, I

encouraged the council to come forward with their plans. Mr Speaker

and other European countries with refugees being taken in, just what

will it take for this government to revise... There are a lot of

unaccompanied children stranded. Surely to look after them in

society? What I would say to the Honorable Lady, if you look at the

chance that the European Union is that Britain is doing more than the

vast majority of other countries. Some countries have made pledges to

resettle the right Syrian refugees that have taken none were only

several cases more than other countries. Our country plan is

working. Can my right honourable friend assured me that it will be

perfect -- perfectly reasonable for any country or our country to veto

the Turkey is akin to your? Of course that is the case, every

country has a veto at every stage. Had to be agreed by every country. A

veto at every stage in every other country will be made every perfectly

clear. Can I ask the Prime Minister when the right honourable member for

them first book to the Prime Minister about pressure being put on

able with disabilities to fill the gap by the deficit, --? I received a

letter from my right honourable friend Thursday, there had been

prolonged discussion in the heart of the government of disability bands

benefit reform, but I have said we're not going to hook those

proposals. Thank you Mr Speaker I believe the real test the compassion

is not... To my right honourable friend confirmed that the government

is taking to liquidate the tax to ensure the riches -- rich people pay

the high amount of the tax and is pending overs... Went honourable

friend makes a good point and you look at the figures, some of the

book easy what is happening to poorest families, they are able to

get jobs, of the tax... That is what is happening for those families, the

people at the top the top 1% are paying a higher percentage of income

taxed to me ever did under Labor. I think with a growing economy

weakened build the there is certainly. Amazingly a few moments

ago, Ireland the matter hands, as... The prime minister has an aside to

else does he have an his sights with Scotland and Ireland port was white

the island that was in the plan referring to $100 per barrel or a

boil. You can tell they don't like it when you're shouting, you are

losing. You are an exceptionally citable fellow you must have

yourself accordingly. Now and altogether more subdued my Honorable

friend now. It is often said that the EU is undemocratic, laws are

imposed deposit upon us. Is it his decision that the Prime Minister

reports on that, an example of how Britain can mould and shape those

rules and regulations? A grit my Honorable friend it is if you get

stuck it is frustrating. Those only cited the argument you should accept

the frustrations referred to by the other side and it has been

frustrating for us the last government, for us. It was put

there, restrictions were put there to have reasonable strayed and

cross-border issues. It is too inflexible, these changes worked

well. With the Prime Minister agree with

me that world populations are moving and changing anyway we would not

wish away. Does he agree with me we need a strong and united European

Union to manage those great challenges and without it, we will

be alone and unable to help these people? Obviously I think

cooperation amongst the European Union nations helps but it is also

important, as well for cooperation, that we have the right ideas. I

think he is trying to say there's a lot of movement are of people around

the world but the scale of movement from Africa has been so much greater

in recent years, not because of growing African poverty, but because

of weakness of North African states and the lack of adequate border

arrangements. If we have the right thinking plus the cooperation, we

can get the right answer. Does the Prime Minister agree that the best

way to show compassion and to provide support for those in need

that are at home, Syria, or elsewhere in the world is to build a

stronger economy and generate the resources needed to look after them.

My honourable friend is absolutely right. You cannot show your

compassion unless you have a strong economy generating revenues that are

harping service needs, that our schools need, and that our welfare

system needs. We understand on the side of the House that compassion is