15/06/2011 Prime Minister's Questions

between what they pay and what other taxpayers pay. Questions to

This morning I had a meeting with colleagues and others. Initial to

know why duties, I shall have further meetings later.

Thousands of people in my constituency work hard at for less

than �26,000 a year. Does my right honourable friend agree with me

that everybody who believes in the necessity of capping benefits must

vote for the Welfare Reform Bill tonight? My honourable friend is

right. We are right to reform welfare. Welfare costs have got out

of control in our country. We want to make sure that work always pays.

We want to make sure that if people do the right thing, we are on their

side. It cannot be right for some families to get over �26,000 a year

in benefits that is paid for by people who are working hard and pay

their taxes. Everyone in the House should support the welfare bill

tonight. It is disappointing that Labour talk about welfare, but will

not vote for welfare reform. THE SPEAKER: Ed Miliband.

Mr Speaker, when the Prime Minister signed off his welfare bill, did he

know that it would make 7000 cancer patients worse off by as much as

�94 a week? That is not the case. We are using the same definition of

people who are suffering and are terminally ill as the last

government. We want to make sure those people are helped and

protected. If you are in favour of welfare reform, you want to

encourage people to do the right thing, it is no good talking about

it, you have to vote for it. usual, he does not know what is in

his own bill. Listen to Macmillan Cancer Support. On 13th June 2011 -

cancer patients to lose up to �94 a week. These are people who have

worked hard all their lives, who have done the right thing, who have

paid their taxes. And when they are indeed, the Prime Minister is

taking money away from him. I ask him again, how can it be right that

people with cancer, 7000 of them, are losing �94 a week? We are using

the same test as the last government supported. All we see

here is a Labour Party desperate not to support welfare reform, and

try to find an excuse to get off supporting welfare reform. Anyone

who is terminally ill get immediate access to the higher level of

support. We will provide that to all people who are unable to work.

That is the guarantee we make. He has to stop reading of his

responsibilities and back the welfare reform he talks about.

Speaker, he doesn't know the detail support allowance after one year

for those in work-related activity, cancer patients, 7000 of them, are

losing �94 a week. I ask him again, how can that be right? Order. The

question has been asked. Order. Order. The answer will be heard.

is wrong on the specific point. First of all, our definition of

terminally ill is the same one used by the last government. Anyone out

of work will be given the extra support that comes from employment

support allowance, irrespective of a person's income or assets. That

will last for 12 months. He is wrong, and he should admit it. On a

means-tested basis, this additional support can last indefinitely. That

is the truth. He should check his facts before he comes to the house

and chickens out of welfare reform. Let's be clear about this. In the

first answer, he said his policy was the same as the last government.

Now he has admitted that they are ending contributory best employment

support allowance after one year. Let me tell him what Macmillan

Cancer Support says. I think they should listen. This is what they

are saying. I think it is a disgrace that Conservative members

are shouting while we are talking about people with cancer. This is

what they say. Many people will lose this benefit simply because

they have not recovered quickly enough. Mr Speaker, asking the

question again, will he now admit that 7000 cancer patients are

losing up to �94 a week? Let me explain it again to him. I do not

think he has got the point. Order. Order. I think it is a disgrace

that members on both sides of the house are shouting their heads off

when matters of the most serious concern are being debated. I repeat

what I have said before. The public despise this sort of behaviour.

Let's have a bit of order. This is important, and I want to explain to

the honourable gentleman why he has got it wrong and what we are

proposing is right. The definition of who is terminally ill, these are

horrible things to discuss, but let me explain. It is the same

definition, six months. Anyone out of work who lives longer than that

will be given the extra support that comes from employment support

allowance. That is irrespective of a person's income or their assets,

and will last for 12 months, not the six months that the Leader of

the Opposition said. On a means- tested basis, this additional

support can last indefinitely. It is the same test as the last

government. It is put in place fairly. We have listened to

Macmillan Cancer Support, and we have made sure someone is reviewing

all the medical tests that take place under the system. I know he

wants to create a distraction from the fact that he will not support

welfare reform, but I have answered his question. He should now answer

mind - why will you not back the bill? In case he had forgotten, I

asked the questions, and he fails to answer them. Let me try and

explain it to him. Listen to professor Jane Mayer, chief medical

officer or of Macmillan Cancer Support. "in my experience, one

year is simply not long enough for many people to recover from cancer.

The serious physical and psychological side-effects can last

for many months, even years after treatment has finished. It is

crucial that patients are not forced to return to work before

they are ready". Macmillan Cancer Support and Britain's cancer

charities have been making this argument for months. I am amazed

that the Prime Minister does not know about this argument. Why

doesn't he know about these arguments? The House of Commons is

voting on this bill tonight. He should know about these arguments.

I ask him again, will he now admit that 7000 cancer patients are

losing up to �94 a week? I have answered his question three times.

With a full explanation. The whole point about our benefit reforms is

that there are proper medical tests. So we support those who cannot work

as a generous and compassionate country should, but we make sure

those who can work have to go out to work so that we do not reward

bad behaviour. He is attempting to put up a smokescreen, because he

has been found out. He made a speech this week about the

importance of welfare reform, but he cannot take his divided party

with him. That is what this is about, weak leadership of a divided

party. Mr Speaker, what an absolute disgrace to describe cancer

patients in this country as a smokescreen. This is about cancer

charities who are concerned on their behalf, and he does not know

his own policy. It is not about those who are terminally ill, it is

about those recovering from cancer who are losing support as a result

of this government. We know he does not think his policies through.

Isn't this one occasion when if ever there was a case to pause,

listen and reflect, this is it. Why doesn't he do so? This week, we

have seen the honourable gentleman get on the wrong side of every

issue. If it is cutting the deficit, we now have these CBI, the IMF, his

brother, Tony Blair, all on our side and only he is on his own. On

welfare reform, we have everyone recognises that welfare needs to be

reformed, apart from the right honourable gentleman. On the health

service, yes, we now have the Royal College of GPs, the Royal College

of Nurses, the Royal College of Physicians, the former Labour

Health Minister and Tony Blair all on the side of reform. And on his

own, the right honourable gentleman, a weak leader of a divided party.

That is what we have learned this Prime Minister, Mike constituent's

mother, a British national, on a recent visit to India, was

kidnapped and then beheaded in a horrendous murder incident. Can I

ask the British Government to urge the Indian authorities to carry out

a fall and transparent and thorough investigation and bring to account

those responsible for this horrendous murder so that my

constituents and his family can get justice for their mother?

understand why my honourable friend wants to raise this case. On behalf

of the house, we send our condolences to the family. I

understand their wish for justice to be brought to bear on the

perpetrators. The Foreign Office has been providing the family with

consular support, and they will arrange to meet my right honourable

friend and the family to see what further assistance we can give.

However, responsibility for investigating crime committed

overseas has to rest with the police and judicial authorities in

that country. We cannot interfere in the processes, but I take to

heart the points he makes. Speaker, we know that the deficit

was the price paid to avoid a depression caused by... Are caught

by the bankers. But in March, the forecast for the budget deficit was

increased by �46 billion, �1,000 per person. Will he now at last

accept that cuts are choking growth, that that is stoking inflation, and

both are increasing the deficit? He is going too far, too fast,

hindering and not helping the recovery. Yes or no? The deficit is

the price paid for Labour's profligacy in office. Tony Blair in

his memoirs, I know they do not want to hear about Tony Blair any

more, funny, that. He was a Labour leader who used to win elections.

He said that by 2007, spending was out of control. We have to get on

top of debt and spending and the deficit. I understand that the

Labour leader is trying to persuade the shadow Chancellor of that. Good

The Prime Minister will be aware that yesterday was the anniversary

of the liberation of the Falkland Sees the United States will he

remind the President that they will never be acceptable to her

Majesty's government, and if the special relationship means anything,

it means that they defend British sovereign treat -- sovereignty over

our own territory. He makes an excellent point and I'm sure

everybody will want to remember the anniversary of the successful

retaking of the Falkland Islands and the superb bravery and courage

of all our armed forces who took part in that action. We should also

remember those that fell in terms of taking back the Falklands. The

point he makes is a good one. What I would say is this, as long as the

Falkland Islands want to be a sovereign British territory, they

should remain so. End of story. This week we have seen the

government changed its mind on the NHS, and sentencing, student visas

and dustbin collection, so will the Prime Minister tell us now whether

the Prime Minister will change his mind on a government plans to force

women to wait up to two years longer before they qualify for

their state pensions? All parties supported the equalisation of the

pension age between men and women. That needed to happen. It also

needs to happen that we raise pension ages to make sure the

pension system is affordable. Appoint a would make is because we

have been able to do that, we have really into pensions back to

earnings, and pensioners are �15,000 better off in their

retirement than they would have been under Labour. I think that is

a good deal and the right thing to do. If anyone in the party opposite

wants to be serious about pension reform and dealing with the deficit,

I agree with the government's timetable for increasing the men's

state pension age to 66, because it happens gradually. But I would ask

the Prime Minister to think again about women's state pension age.

The timetable has women's state pension age going up too quickly

and leaves women of my age, born in 1954, without enough time to plan

for what could be two years extra work. Will the Government please

look at this again? I understand the concerns about this. But I said

in the House last week that over 80 % of those affected will only see

their pension age come in one year later. So it is actually a very

relatively small number. But the key thing is making sure that the

pension system is sustainable so we can pay out higher pensions. There

is a similar argument that the house was having in the previous

set of questions about the sustainability of public sector

pensions. We have to take these difficult decisions. They are right

for the long term and they mean a better pension system for those who

are retiring. Does the Prime Minister agree with the Institute

for Fiscal Studies that with inflation at 4.5 %, more than twice

the government target, it is hitting pensioners and lower income

families the hardest? The point about pensions is there is the

triple guarantee that they will go up by earnings or 2.5 %, or

whichever is higher, so it won't affect them in that way. We clearly

want to see inflation come down. There is a shared agreement across

the House that it is right for the Bank of England to have the

responsibility. I notice he does not raise today the welcome news

that we have seen the biggest fall in unemployment in one month

figures than we have seen at any time in a decade. I think it is

time the party opposite started welcoming that good news. There is

increasing concern within the house and across the country about the

hidden suffering of traffic to children and re- trafficked

children. Does the Prime Minister agree that it is essential that a

co-ordinated, multi-agency approach across the country from borders to

local authorities and local police forces, including the excellent

charitable organisations involved in the work, is promoted urgently?

My Honourable Friend makes extremely good point and I know how

hard the party works on this group. I listen very carefully on what

they have to say. One thing that I hope will make a difference is the

formation of the National crime agency which should bring a greater

co-ordination to vital issues such as this.

The SNP won a landslide in the recent elections and the mandate to

improve the powers of the Scottish parliament. So will the Prime

Minister respect the Scottish electorate and accept the six

proposals for improvement in the Scotland Bill by the Scottish

government? For we listened very carefully to what people have to

say and week of course respect that the SNP won the mandate in Scotland

and we are responding positively. But the first point I would make is

that the Scotland Bill before the house is a massive extension of

devolution. He shakes his head, but is an extra �12 billion of spending

power. We will go ahead with that and look at the proposals that Alex

Salmond has had. I take the respect agenda seriously, but it is a two-

way street. A street in which I respect the views of the Scottish

people, but they also have to respect we are still part of, and

will always be part of, I believe, a United Kingdom. Last Friday was

the 9th anniversary of the British Legion, and on Tuesday, 120

soldiers from the Air assault Brigade will march into Parliament

to welcome them back from Afghanistan. Can have a Prime

Minister repeat his assurance that the armed forces covenant will be

rewritten for the first time in history and written into law?

give that assurance and I'm delighted that the Royal British

Legion have agreed an approach we will take in the Armed forces Bill

and that is being passed through the house. I am glad that the

forced -- House of Commons will be welcoming the soldiers from the

Brigade as the rest of the armed forces, the bravest of the brave,

the best of the best, there isn't too much we can do for the people,

which is why the armed forces covenant matters and why we kept

our promise Stoop double the operational allowance to soldiers

serving in Afghanistan. Millions of our constituents are once more

facing big increases in their gas and electricity bills. Many will

find it very difficult to make ends meet. What action will the

government take to help them? are taking a range of actions.

Obviously, the fact we have or oil costing $115 per barrel and gas

prices rising by 15 % over a year, that has an impact, but we are

putting �250 million into the warm home discount and funding a more

targeted warm front scheme that will help 47,000 families this year.

We are legislating so social tariffs have to offer the best

prices available. We are keeping a promise to say that Post Office

card account holders should get a discount. We are keeping the winter

fuel payment. And we have permanently increase the cold

weather payments. We didn't just allow him to be increased in an

election year. We are keeping the higher payments that are very

valuable to his constituents. week my Honourable Friend the

Member for Stoke visited a school near Stafford. In meetings, parents

expressed the excellent teaching -- gratitude for the excellent

teaching but also of a provision of their children after the age of 19.

Knowing his deep concern in the area, what encouragement can my

right honourable friend give them? We have to support special schools.

The pendulum again special education swung too far against

inclusion, and it is important we give parents and carers proper

choices to make sure they can choose between mainstream and

special education. He raises the important point that many parents

of disabled children when they become young adults want them to go

on studying in further education colleges and elsewhere, but the

current rules seem to suggest that once they have finished the course,

that is it. Parents asked what we will do now and we have to find a

better answer for parents who are finding their much-loved children

living for much longer and want them to have a purposeful and

complete life. In the face of what are crippling energy price rises,

driving pensioners and one off family into fuel poverty by the

thousands every day under the coalition, can I ask him, he's heat

struggling with his energy bill or are any others of the 21

millionairess in his Cabinet struggling with the energy bills?

And when is he going to take a personal grip of this situation?

From reading the papers this week the people who seem to be coining

it are the ones who worked for the last government, but there we are.

Clearly fuel prices have gone up because of what has happened to

World War -- world gas and oil prices, but we are serious about

helping families. That is why we have frozen the council tax and a

lifting one million people out of tax and a taken a set of measures

to help with energy bills which I describe. We have also managed to

cut petrol tax this year, paid for by the additional tax on the North

Sea oil industry. I notice that while the party opposite wants to

support the petrol price tax, they don't support the fuel -- increase

in the North Sea oil tax. Absolutely typical of an

opportunistic opposition. The Prime Minister will be aware that this

week is National diabetes wheat and the theme this year is let's talk

diabetes to encourage people with the condition to speak out and not

feel stigmatised all worried about being discriminated against, or

joked against in school or in the workplace. Would the Prime Minister

please support the campaign? certainly will. And my Honourable

Friend makes extremely good point, that many people with diabetes find

it an embarrassingly honest and something they don't want to talk

about, yet it is affecting more and more people. We have to find a way

to encourage people to say that there is nothing abnormal or wrong,

but we need to help people manage their diabetes, particularly

because you want to see them have control over health care and spend

less time in hospital if at all possible. I fully support the

campaign and we have to look at the long-term cost of people getting

diabetes and recognise there is a big public health agenda,

particularly about exercise, that we need to get hold of. The Prime

Minister will know that this is the first opportunity I have had to ask

him a question. I stand here fresh and full of hope, so why would give

the Prime Minister one more chance to answer the question. People in

my constituency and up and down the country faced enormous increases in

their energy bills announced by Scottish Power. They need help now.

When is the Prime Minister going to keep his promise, made in

opposition, to take tough action on it excessive energy prices? As I

said in answer some moments ago, we are taking action. There is only a

certain amount you can do when you see fuel prices go up by as much as

they have over the last year, a 50 % increase in oil and gas, but we

do have the warm home in Kuyt -- Discount, the warm front scheme,

and making sure that where there are special tariffs, companies have

to offer them to their users. That makes a difference and there is the

point about the Post Office card account holders who currently don't

get all the discounts available to people who paid by direct debit. We

are making sure they get the discount. She shakes her head, but

in one year that's a lot more than Would my Right Honourable friend

congratulate the ladies in Ilkeston who made part of the lace on the

Duchess of Cambridge's wedding dress. This is the last traditional

lace factory here, and that town centre has declined in the recent

years over those losses. Would my Right Honourable Friend agree with

me that the review into revitalising our town centres has

come at a perfect time and time by the Prime Minister to attend our

constituents as part of this. would be delighted to come to the

constituency. I didn't know that their constituents were responsible

for the lace on the Duchess's incredible dress, but I feel I

leave today's session enriched by the knowledge. We do want to see

the growth in manufacturing and production in Britain, and what we

are seeing in the economy, difficult as the months ahead will

inevitably be, a growth of things made in Britain, whether that is

cars, vans or lace for people stresses. Mr Speaker, the United

States secretary of state, Robert Gates, has said - I beg your pardon,

Secretary of Defence - has said that the NATO operation in Libya

has exposed serious security gaps. A first -- but First Sea Lord,

Admiral Mark Stanhope, has said that the operation in Libya cannot

be sustained for longer than three months without serious cuts

elsewhere. Given those problems... Isn't it time that the Prime

Minister reopened at the defence review and did another U-turn on

his failed policies? He is called Mark Stanhope, that is his name. I

had a meeting of the First Sea Lord yesterday, and he agreed we could

sustain the mission as long as we need to, and that is exactly the

words that the chief of defence staff used yesterday, because we

are doing the right thing. I want one simple message to go out from

every part of this government and every part of this House of Commons,

that time is on our side. We have got NATO, the United Nations, the

Arab League and we have right on our side. The pressure is building,

militarily, diplomatically, politically and time is running out

for Colonel Gaddafi. On the issue of the defence review, I would say

this. For 10 years they haven't had a defence review, now they want to

win a row. At the end of this review we have the 4th highest

defence budget for any country in the world. We have superb armed

forces, superbly equipped and they are doing a great job in the skies

By the time PMQs have finished, 450 children will have died from

preventable disease and famine. Is it not the case that increasing

Britain's aid budget is very much the right thing to do and will save

millions of lives across the world. I very much welcome the support

from the Honourable Gentleman for the policy of increasing our aid

budget and reaching the 0.7 % target of gross national income. I

think there are good reasons for doing this. First of all, we are

keeping a promise to the poorest people in the poorest countries of

the world and we are saving lives. Yes, of course, things are

difficult at home but I think we should keep the promise even in the

midst of difficulties. The second point I would make is that we are

making sure our aid budget is spent very specifically on things like

that she Nations for children that will save lives. -- vaccinations.

That will mean a child vaccinated every two seconds and a life saved

every two minutes. The last point I would make to anyone who has doubts

about this issue, is I really do think that as well as saving lives,

it is also about Britain's standing for something in the world and

standing up for something in the world, the importance of having a

strong aid budget, mending broken countries, as well as having an

issue as well. In that this carer's week when we celebrate the

contribution of Birmingham's care assistants and the loving families

who look after their loved ones, will the Prime Minister join with

me in condemning Birmingham City Council for cutting care to 4,100

of the most vulnerable in our city, branded unlawful by the High Court.

Bank and I asked the Prime Minister what he intends to do to make sure

that never again does Birmingham City Council fail the elderly and

disabled? I think everybody in the House should welcome that it is

Careys week, and I will have a reception in Number Ten tonight to

celebrate that with many people who take part and are carers. This

government is putting in �400 million to give carers more breaks

and specifically putting in �800 million to make sure those looking

after disabled children get regular breaks. What we have in Birmingham

is an excellent Conservative and Liberal Democrat alliance doing a

very good job recovering from a complete mess Labour made of the

Last night on Channel 4 television there was documentary called the

killing fields, showing the atrocities committed by the Sri

Lankan government to the Tamil people which resulted in over

40,000 people being killed. Would the Prime Minister join me in

calling for justice for the Tamil people and the people who have lost

their lives? I didn't see the documentary, but I understand it

was an extremely powerful programme and it refers to some very worrying

events that are alleged to have taken place towards the end of that

campaign. And what the government has said, along with other

governments, is that there should Lankan government does need this to

be investigated and the UN needs this to be investigated and we need

to make sure we get to the bottom of what happened. The Prime

Minister will be aware of the shambles of corporate governance

which is the duration at Natural Resources Corporation. I would not

expect him to give specific comment on it, but would he agree on behalf

of millions of pension holders and small shareholders across the

country that high standards of corporate governance at the City of

London is critical, as is the role of the Financial Reporting Council?

I am aware of this problem and the Honourable Gentleman makes

important point. We have caused want companies to come to London to

access capital to float on the main market, and that is one of the

attractions of Britain, that we are an open economy, but when the

companies come they have to understand we have rules of

corporate governance that are there for a reason and we need to obey

the rules, and I'm sure the Chancellor will be addressing this

not only in his speech tonight, but also in the papers we will publish

in subsequent days. Mr Speaker, does the Prime Minister agree with

me that if the coalition government had not adopted the economic policy

that it has rather than listen to the advice of the Shadow Chancellor

mortgage interest rates could be 5% higher than what they are now?

Honourable Friend makes important point. In this country today,

tragically, we have agreed levels of government debt that German

interest rates. That is an enormous monetary boost to our economy and

we should all welcome the cut in unemployment today. If we had not