program, through unicef. unicef, i have been watching with fascination and have written about but nothing seems to really happen these days. has been using a u.s. designated iranian bank for a ga gaza appeal. i have asked them about it. are you doing anything about it? that's the kind of swamp where you can go on forever among the small crazed group of people who really dig into this stuff we called them rabbit holes. the rabbit holes, there's a universe of rabbits out there. let me just give you a quick example of who is running what right now at the u.n. the general asem assembly is chaired by libya, the former foreign minister of libya. i'm not sure whether that's a step up or down from last year. :

there is dialogue with his and country al qaeda members, that's where we go and the folks we're dealing with when we go to the u.n. agency is supposed to be dispensing aid to help fix the u.s. image and make people happy and rich and what ever. one more on the is, although

there is one of my favorites of with zimbabwe a few years ago chairing the u.n. commission of sustainable development. [laughter] that was just a sideshow. the u.n. flagship agency, first is a very serious one spends billions around the world and they're so balkanized they don't know what they're doing is that they serve as a great money laundering program for folks like kim jong-il for dictatorship. , the u.n. development program. anyone remembers the name mark brown he got this one into the shape now is. last year the u.n. pp executive board in, it's immediate supervisor in a government body was chaired by anyone knows of this one? iran. [laughter] which has now finished that term is now chairing the a conference in geneva said don't worry. that's the kind of got less the

u.s. has to channel any policy to the u.n., plus there is the unaccountable permanent prc which has gone out across the globe and there is no way to actually police. their solution in america you'll hear a lot of the council on foreign relations of which i am a member. you've got to know these things. and is that america wields great clouds behind the scenes but it's difficult in that we actually have this end at the u.n., we pay more than any other country does and the air base and everything else so we can pull the strings when we need to and make concessions when we don't. actually america does not wield great clouds behind the scenes, that went down on time ago with the g7 teeseven, outvoted and if you want a moment that sums that kept it was a december budget

vote in 2007 number on another record-breaking expansion of the u.n. buy any old budget, every budget they had for years has been a record-breaking expansion. usually these are passed by consensus, animal farm, but on that occasion john bolton recently had been through the u.n. and has some folks to place in the u.s. call for a vote. some countries abstained, but the final vote on this record-breaking expansion of the budget was 141 -- one. anyone care to guess which country was the one? [laughter] of course, the united states. but washington was addition the process and we got to read and sign onto this thing. finally, there really is an important been further problem with funneling foreign policy through this u.n. and that is the very dangerous illusion that something is getting done. i mean, that's one of the reason

it's highly corrupting to the american government itself. you don't know what to do with the problem, send it to the u.n.. as a giant fig leaf and in that way the can has been kicked down that road toward the iranian nuclear bomb in that way it has been kicked passed to north korea nuclear tests, and you go to the u.n.. we have sanctions on north korea, we have sanctions on iran, we've taken problems to the u.n. -- sudan, u.n. has been dealing with them for years. the problem and it sounds like something is getting done, nothing gets done, that's dangerous to live. i think i shouldn't --. bid talk about reform at the u.n., nothing is happening, what little efforts have gone nowhere. the human rights commission some sped up and that was all revamped and has produced the durbin review conference

starting ahmadinejad. one that's the basic problem with funneling things through the u.n. and you to go on. the problem is no one in washington now is to listen and act on it. let me leave you with a final thing yet. the luxembourg done is on the inside headquarters in new york when they're not in the middle of rehab. it's what i call the purpose of iran. i call them because they are the carpets not because they are the carpets, and the front lobby when visitors come from all over the world to see the glorious parliaments of man wrapped in liberty and law as harry truman like to quote from the tennyson poem, one of the first thing is you run across is this lineup of portraits of all the secretaries general and people like to pose in front of them, it looks so great an official and benevolence and if you look closely they and actually paintings. these are woven silk carpets and

woven into the bottom of each of these purposes is the line, and give to the islamic republic of iran. these are presented the first set through the fall of 1977, the first year secretary general. one moon have the same from an iranian front organization of through a fifth avenue skyscraper. they talk to the federal courts about fat. in the heavyset in the front lobby of the building where the united states hosts this place, it deals with the parking ticket problem, pays most of the money come island's most of the credibility and is covering most of the revamped right now we created the u.n.. the first thing that some bases when they walk in there and visitors don't know this and you didn't notice, i will guarantee you that the iranian ambassador and the secretary general's do

now this. our purpose better guess of the islamic republic of iran. there's another one like it with no poor should and found in the u.n. orchid -- sitting next to the office, it was donated this past winter to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the islamic republic and not finding. so finally heard is here to answer your question, no, actually i think it would be great progress if we wished to secure u.s. interests and step on it would be step away from the united nations. to thank you all very much. [applause] >> thank you very much, claudia. i think that's a bit pessimistic, i understood the that of the u.n. security council was very close to a very strong resolution are in darfur

just before the last seven people get machete did to death so don't give up hope just can't. my room -- by the romans win at the darfur thing they had only been killing people for a couple of years and if the amount of corpses was only 100 of 2000 at that stage, the sudanese -- sudan got appointed to the u.s. and human rights council. of course, swinging one knows more about human rights abuses than the government of sudan and i like the way that this sudanese delegate said that dads the hope to make a strong contribution and to the u.n. human rights council and his main priorities for his term would be abu brave and guantanamo so the says the sudanese are not just genocidal butcher's shop, they also got a terrific sense of humor as well. i've been asked to say a few

words about one political correctness in then geopolitical sense which is an interesting take on an tenth. because i think we think of it as just something that affects universities, campuses and that kind of world. it doesn't, it spread way beyond that. and i think actually it underpins what we've been talking about today which is why is the most powerful nation in on the face of the earth, the global hydropower, unable to enforce its will in the world today? swearing-in and the idea that somehow we despite our unparalleled economic power and military power we still get the sense we're tired and constrained. i think it comes back in the end to a lot of these aspects of political correctness.

we were talking about somebody mentioned earlier there is 500,000 people on the suspected terrorist list but only 4,000 people on the no fly less. like this -- you know this if you try to fly at of the party on u.s. air basically the five and 2,000 people and the suspected terrorists lister on standby for the no-fly list. [laughter] standby for u.s. air, stand by for united and american airlines, the standby for the no-fly list. but some of those 500,000 people on a suspected terrorist list at any time in you could be sitting next to one of the 496,000 who like frustrated and residents of manhattan tried to get into a good restaurant haven't been able to get a seat on the much coveted no fi list. and why is that? that's because we have decided as a proposition and that we as

a basic proposition of homeland security that all 7 billion people on the planet have to be treated as an able security risk when they turn up at the airports. recant you anything about that. likewise even george w. bush who is regarded around the world as a huge robert, diggs library texan cowboy as we've heard, couldn't -- could only declare in the days after september 11th a war on the terror. now, normally you have a war on germany, you have a bar on belgium, you have a war on pg -- answering at suggestions by the way with and if you have a warrant and belgium were on fiji you now have it will end with your guys marching through this streets of brussels and taking down their flag and running yours up the flagpole. how can you know when you've won a war and terror? furthermore, if you cannot even name of the enemy, it doesn't

have that telling the enemy something about the will and confidence you bring to the struggle. i sought to panel cartoon couple months back and on the left hand panel it said that this is your brain and on the right-hand panel and said this is your brain on political correctness and and it was a small and shriveled then. it's a cult of stupidity. but what happens when is so ingrained in our schools, churches, media, and our government that it becomes in effect the air that we breathe? the great strength of what we call multi-cultural a son is in that it is an argument for this or that. but that is short circuits the rear possibility of arguments period if someone says, well, i'm calling as you can say i'm a fascist, and in a sense of their ideology is designed to be opposition of. they're designed to provoke an

argument, but the genius of multi-cultural lesson is that it's beyond argument. nothing matters, there's no difference. on the one hand, and wish, law and the other hand sharia. what's the difference, what is to get uptight about. and the one hand women's rights, on the other hand in with honor killings in a fabulous range of could direct me clinics. what's the big deal? they are both equally as the university of professor say valid. even into wants, even to want to debate the respective merits is to put yourself on the wrong side because it a core belief of multi-cultural wasn't is in effect there's nothing to talk back and everything is equally nice and fluffy then to favor of this argument or debate puts you by definition on the extremists i did. i was on an npr show a couple of

years ago and at pointed out as an aside that there were very happy free muslim societies and the caller said what you mean by that and so you pull up a few facts about free and fair elections, freedom of religion, women's rights, independent judiciary, and she says that's just your opinion. [laughter] and you try to point out these are when we used to coax. one and she says i think you're being very high -- spiracle and imposing your values on them and you realize then have the greatest fans fish of cultural relativism is that it renders arguments impossible, there's no longer reality. unfortunately reality is still out there and has a way of asserting itself. two years ago i did a quick blog opposed on the internet about a small bbc story that, r.i., the italian performance artist,

known s with the back fence set off to hitchhike from milan to the palestinian territories superman will peace. she was dressed as a bride and and the purpose of her trip was to show if only you put your trust in our common humanity that all will be wow. a month later her naked body was found in the bushes near turkey, she had been gang rapes and then killed. in her involutions match reality. this is your brain on political correctness. she did not deserve to die, she was 33 which means that she had been marinated in political correctness almost have and type -- entire life and she made the mistake of believing it. most of us as individuals retained in the survival instinct that if we find ourselves in a rough city block late at night you must follow back to the lobby of the gramm higher.

and now what what happens when there are solutions that become the dominant political discourse of a free society institutionally it few weeks ago 13 men and women plus an unborn baby were gunned down at four to would have by a major in the united states army. it is in some way, they died depth, because of political correctness. people keep talking about we didn't. >> the dots. you didn't need to. he had a big neon sign on his head. he has soldier of all on his business card. walter reed army medical center consider the question of whether then captain façade was, in fact, quote psychotic, but they weren't how would it look if we can get one of 50 muslim residents. so instead did they promoted him to major and shipped him to fort hood and even when he'd done what he had done the u.s. army's

chief of staff said that quote what happens if there was a tragedy but i believe it would be an even greater tragedy in our diversity becomes a casualty here. with the army chief of staff and is saying that the fatuous superstations before it marshmallow allusions that led to the tragedy cannot be questioned him. one of this is been a passion now for almost nine years. if you remember the days after september 11th of a first reaction of just about every problem western leader was to visit a mosque and president bush did it. the prince of wales.com the prime minister of united kingdom, prime minister of canada all went to a mosque and when they got there and it had died down you couldn't help feeling this was strike almost any previous generation as entirely bazaar.

fdr, his pearl harbor being attacked and he says can you get me into a decent sushi restaurant or madame butterfly? [laughter] seeking to end reassure the cover religion, those who murder you, that you not regard them all is the enemy, it may be a worthy aim but it is a very curious and revealing first priority. and let me give it three more examples of a nation under attack feeling obliged to demonstrate its evenhandedness to an absurd degree. a couple years back i visited guantanamo and had a to summon up in a single image to be the brand new car ran into each and occupied south. to reassure incoming inmates at the wealthy infidels have attached the sacred book with their unclean hands, but iran is an from the wall in pristina

surgical masks to tell the incoming detainee is that there uncontaminated. now it's one thing for muslims to regard infidels in some unclean but it's hard to see what is in the interest of the united states government to string along with add and thereby validating their bigotry. [applause] second example, there was a man called kadar, who was known to his fellow jihad in afghanistan s alcan adding because u.s. the highest ranking canadian in al qaeda and lease until osama bin laden canadian passport turns up at the back of the cave. he was killed in a shootout with pakistan forces. one's son of his was captured on the battlefield in afghanistan

and killed a u.s. soldier and he was shipped to gitmo and he is now a cause celeb for the canadian bar association and similar groups of this is quite a family. another son was paralyzed in a firefight in pakistan and not fanzine spending the rest of his life in a prison hospital there were health care is about the level it will be after this new plan kicks in here --. [laughter] the kid and his mom blue quote home to toronto to enjoy the benefits of ontario health care. in this boy is canadian born and bred, canadian troops are in afghanistan fighting al qaeda so if you're canadian born and bred that's the side in canadian is meant to be on. when instead in this guy is fighting for al qaeda the enemy, the other side. it could be he just checked the wrong box of one who i don't know. [laughter] trees and used to be defined

give up their as giving aid and comfort to the queen's enemies but this guy is likely be on that. he is the queen said in a, he's out there with a gun firing of our side. but postmodern, oppose national societies no longer believe in trees and so when the present mayflies on to toronto for his free health care and people say this is ridiculous and the then prime minister of canada for martin were bustling declare i believe that once you are a canadian citizen you have the right here on douzaine to disagree. would have killed this squish of a man to express of mildest case at the idea of tax dollars paying for the treatment of a man who citizenship is no more than a flag of convenience but unfortunately that's the law. apparently so. instead his reflex instinct was two proclaim in this as a whole hearted demonstration of the virtues of a multi-cultural

state so badly tolerant that when the draft card arrives for the afghan war in lets you check which side you want to be on a. [laughter] colonel west talked earlier about sedition. sedition is an arcane word now. nobody uses except people like colonel west and then they think it's one of those weird words like constitutional -- why does he bring that up here this edition entries in today want concepts we no longer recognize but if we're forced to recognize we put them in the same category as lesbianism or vegetarianism, it's an alternative lifestyle. whenever is your bag. [laughter] i thought at the time that is canada, wouldn't happen here but it has as we heard today. taxpayers will blow through $100 million to pretend that kgs them is a criminal. the digestible up a plane and kill hundreds of americans and

you read him his rights and the presidents of the united states and addresses the nation like a deputy district attorney in passing a drug smuggler as we heard it. the allegedly alleges suspect is allegedly taken into allegedly elijah custody. the protections of the u.s. constitution extend to 7 billion people across the planet heretofore at any rate that proportion of their of with interest to the old arab with bt's with borderline half-life. at work here, in totalitarian dictatorships they have show trials. we have show trials also. the president was asked while he was in china i believe whether there was any possibility, what would happen in the if ks emma was a convicted and he said don't worry he will be found guilty. i'm not a lawyer but what kind of a trial is that? [laughter] if there is no possible -- wide

holdings if there's no possibility this new york courthouse we find the defendant guilty nth like frank sinatra and rabin and the seventh prince in 1963i think it was he will come out of the program and say my kind of town new york city. [laughter] if there is no possibility of a him having his frank sinatra moment where hold the trial? were a show trial in a dictatorship is designed to show the state means business. don't mess with it, we tell the world we are a joke and will prostrate ourselves before multi-cultural illusions, not to tell the world how strong endowment m2z we are to signal the exact opposite. how to the attitudes revealed in that case, the anavar bomber,

the brands at gitmo, how does that manifests itself in the wider world? this panel is about sovereignty. that we talk about what political correctness does to sovereignty. and nationalism is political correctness on a global scale. it takes to the relativist assumptions of multi-cultural as some and applies them into nationally. no wealthy developed nation should have a national interest because the national interest is a selfish interests so a wealthy developed nation as we heard from claudia could only represent the interests of the global commons of the province of men so we wind up one of the copenhagen global warming boondoggle before christmas with a preposterous but to quote of the chinese port bureau having to save the western world from committing economic suicide. because the chinese communists have not yet reached the end of the state of consciousness by which sophisticated nation

sabotages their own national interest to demonstrate to this were true. you see this in our foreign wars. for a modern western nation of war is only legitimate if you have no conceivable national interest in whenever confiture fighting. kosovo is a classic example, no one remembers why we went in, who were the good guys and what the hell's the point of it was but if you look at the rationale for the war as advanced by bill clinton and tony blair, the principal rationale was that there was no rationale for it to. [laughter] the fact that we had no stake in its justified are getting into eds. we're as afghanistan and iraq morally dubious if not illegal as is now being discovered in the netherlands and other places precisely because we had a very explicit national interests and as we see in afghanistan with starts out as a string for a military campaign to remove their enemies from power and

kill as many bad guys as possible, colonels in extra believe under the ragin of chance nationalism into thankless, natural nation-building rendered impossible and the ridiculous rules of engagement. shelby steele says the tentativeness of our performance in the iraq as a geopolitical version of a white guilt. a kind of secular penitence for the sins of the past. we can only go to war if we have to go to war with one arm tied behind our backs. and i think there is a lot of truth in that, that because of the entire concept of nationalism is being so denigrated even as the superpower has to pretend that it does not go out in the world but represents its own national interests but instead has

somehow the unofficial swat team of the global police department and that's very dangerous. claudia talk about the united nations, that was a transnational institutions created by an america which as a plan i think global affirmative action program. we artificially downplayed our voice and artificially upgraded everybody also we pretend we're merely one invoked, co eagles on international bodies man by belgium and botswana. if we are lucky pierre usually it is sudan and north korea. that's the transnational version of the summit of action. in recent years, for example i can find only one example of a senior u.n. figure having the guts to call a member state a totalitarian regime. it was a former secretary general boutros boutros-ghali in 2004 and talking about america.

..

>> it's not the prime minister of the free nations in europe or the president of the united states, but our best shot of warding off that future is the fact that emerging powers such as china and india are more or less conventional mission states in a way that -- i think the question progressives said we ought to ask ourself after september 11 was if we recall why do they hate us? a writer put it much more relevant. why do we hate us? after all, if all of our constitutions from grade school to public broadcasting to hollywood movies operate that western civilization is the front of racism, imperillism, why be surprised that the rest of humanity takes this as our

word. i sometimes make that point and i occasionally get e-mails like the one i got a couple of months ago after i expressed mild irritation at the arch bishop called in the united kingdom, silly me state said my correspondent, we're rich enough to be afford to be stupid. we're not as rich as we were when he sent the e-mail a year and a half ago. but reare more stupid. -- we are more stupid. i think we will find ourselves in deep and irretrievable levels, unless we reverse it. it's a question now of actually reversing it here at home starting in kindergarten and

prekindergarten. because that's where it starts. political connectness, what matters when you do to war is not the heart, it's not the tanks, it's not the the planes, it's not the soldiers, they are the masses by which you carry out, what determines whether you win is will and confidence and in the multicultural west, our values that we have no values, we have got then all values equally. to believe in everything to believe in nothing and to stand for nothing. and if you listen to the statements of this administration, from the president to his tsa nominee, the man who thinks that the muslim world sends suicide bomb withers on to our planes because we are alive with israel, which is like an old line, and with france, which is this peculiar tsa nominee ringful on it, he

thinks the bomber boarded the plane because america is allied with israel and france. to believe in everything is to believe in nothing and to stand for nothing. the present administration is the disastrous embodiment of that. thank you very much. [applause] >> the hour is quite passing. if you have questions, step up and ask them briskly. >> okay. you are extremely well

enumerated. let me add the favorable at tributes of the -- attributes of the u.n. of which i have to disagree. the u.s. is the most preferred of the equals in the amount of money we pay to the u.n.. helping our deficit. what i'm confused about, given the lack of people in the this room and our people who agree with us, what is it about the u.n. that has foreclosured any effective attempt the by america to be practical and start doing something about either withdrawing from the u.n. or at least starting some movement which might get the u.n. to give us a more favorable treatment.

>> in the interest, the undergrowth there is so vast, to try and actually change the u.n., do anything about the u.n., get rid of the u.n., or pull the u.s. out of the u.n., there is an enormous food chain of consultants, advisers, people work for it, work in programs, u.n. dispenses somewhere upward of $20 billion a year, around the world. and that all flows through people that have connections for the most part. very hard to change anything. add to that, it doesn't account to anyway under law. we had a couple of prosecutions under oil that were done for food that were very nicely done, in terms of changing something, getting some real effect, there's no traction. there's no mechanism to hold anything to account. if they pass more resolutions,

who deals with china? am i addressing the question? [inaudible] >> i think. yeah, i understand. i think i'm going to be quick. to leave room. i think it's in great part a function of two things. one is the mind bending of actually trying to master things to do with the u.n.. the problem is arguing about the u.n. is the people who live off of it know lots about it. that's their business. the people that see there ought to be something else done, they have much better things to do. i personally prefer poetry to u.n. documents. okay.

the other things is there have been -- the u.n. naturally attracted people like the idea of more medaling. this is the seasoning ware for u.s. and many other places. there are extremely effective market operations. i give you one example. this is something that you should know. the right does not do. really, certainly, i don't see how you can through the u.n.. somebody for creative than i have has to address this. ted turner gave $1 million to 1997. expect he has yet to actually complete that gift. what it really amounted to, he set up a deal where he would give $100 million a year through the foundation and set they up a

special department that would receive that money and work with ted turner's foundation to decide how it should be spent inside the u.n.. those of you familiar with finance would know this as a leverage. it was a way of leveraging, ted turner announced he would reduce to $50 million, but collect from other foundations. and give that to the u.n. as part of the gift from his foundation. he effectively bout himself the seat at the united nations. and not just to seat, but with direct access to secretary generals office and that's foundation spends lots of money on what is called outreached and sends documentary on how great the u.n. to the schools your

children attend where they get to do the una, usa, many, many ngos throwing around here, and that is my very long answer to your very good question. immense marketing, oh, and ps, the u.s. spends way upwards of $100 million a year on public relations which they call the public information department devoted mainly to telling everybody how really great they are. >> mark, as you have been in the canadian human rights commission, maybe i would really love to hear a few words from you about your opinion of the imminent trial or charges in the netherlands for insulting muslims. what he did was to make the $16 million film approaching them.

all of the issues are about governments. governments are concluded that yes they have a problem with the me -- knee anderral class. and what is the best way to manage that? the best way to manage is for the state to essentially regulate the bounds of political opinion. there was a story that had gone back to the christmas day bombers. the story in the "new york times" about how he had been radicalized in britain. poverty causes resentment, poverty breeds resentment, resentment weeds extremism, extremeism breeds terrorism. this guy lived in a $4 million

pad in london. and he was radicalized, and "the new york times" did a story reporting on the radicalization of muslim youth, the wrist of the world -- it's a very popular politician, we're not talking about a minor figure here. it's what -- we're not talking about some louie whack cohere. we're talking about someone who's party could find itself the largest party in the dutch partment -- parliament trying to criminalize the expression of

the dutch photos on this. and i think this is -- this is why the europe unionization of the world will prove a disaster because with they can't keep the lid on. they won't be able to keep the lid on. and when the respectable political power says you can't talk about this issue, then people turn to unrespectable political parties. and so you will start to see and neofastist. you are seeing it already. there's a bulgarian fascist party. if you look at the g.o.p. squishes. if the republican party renamed itself attack then olympia snowe and susan collins would say can't we be position gnat attack, reach-across-the air attack.

in bulgarian, we are the attack party. we will see this more and more if the state persists in it's falling of attempting to manage the opinions of once free people. that prosecution in the netherlands is absolutely disgusting and similar efforts in other countries are worse. and the worse thing of all is the organization of the islamic conference, very power, the u.n. most of the time has come a long way in persuading the u.n. to sign on to a kind of global blasphemy law. whether we can even hold these kinds of discussions, because i'm the one the people who thinks the first amendment can't be chipped away at internationally, at u.n., and otherwise, whether we can even hold these conferences in freedom and openly will be an

interesting question. [applause] >> >> we want to thank the panel. here comes our chairman. >> it's been a long day. i'm going to dispense. i promise to buy everyone in the room if they remain for two more minutes. i have to thank this extraordinary panel and those of you who have attended this event.

i still believe that america is the great land in the world. joe talked about this being an exceptional nation. it is not an exceptional nation, it's the exceptional name. i'm reminded about the story that two people love to tell in chicago during the 1920s who is a lawyer for the capone gang. you have probably seen him per trayed in at least a dozen films, including "public enemy." a member of the gang that was arrested, he would find some technicality to get them off. he came well known, very powerful, very wealthy, as i've indicated. on one occasion, he seems to get a guilty conscience and step down his steps.

as he was walking down his steps, 15 bullets filled his body. he was gone. the capone gang was not going to take any chances with fast eddy. let me go forward, and talk about the name butch o'hair, he was the pilot during world war ii. under the occasion, he was sent down in emission. he looked at his oil gauge in the middle of the pacific. he found he didn't have enough fuel to continue the mission, radios, his captain, and says i have to return to the aircraft carrier, captain says go ahead, as he's going back, he noticed a squadron of zeros about to attack the aircraft carrier. instead of going back and landing, he's decides he's going to attack. with his machine gun, he takes out two planes, he runs out of ammunition, and flies into two of the aircraft, knocking off a wine wing and tail on the

other. taking out four planes. he wins the navy cross as a result of this, two years later, an admission in the pacific, he is shot down over the pacific, and he receives the congressional metal of honor. if you have traveled to chicago and go to terminal one and two, you will see butch o'hair, a airport that the named after him. it will tell about the heroic actions. what it it does not tell you is the fast eddy was the father of butch. in this country, one never knows how things are going to unfold. one said, one never knows do on. let me assure you that we don't know what will happen in the future. i've been very discouraged. there's no question about the portrayal of american life that we've heard during the course of this presentation. i'm also aware of the fact that there's tremendous energy this room. there are great people in america. there are people in this country

who are prepared to take out their pitch forks and begin in the counterrevolution. i'd like to think the counterrevolution begins right here in this room this day. we are going to try to create a grassroots movement across the country. we have bloggers here, c-span here, we have media here, there is no question that many will hear the message that you've heard today. now we are looking for your energy, we are looking for your volunteerism, we are looking for the financial support that you might provide for the this organization. midge and carol ann jed, they are provided the ammunition, many of you have already left. this is the beginning after great venture. we want to take our country back. we believe we can do so. thank you very much for being here. thank you very much for your

help. >> coming up tonight beginning at 8:00 cleve corner, the wealth of nations adam smith's book. what's the discussion about that? >> so we're going to look at adam smith's "wealth of nation" it was first published in 1887, it was often discussed in economic circles. we're going to try to get to an understanding of what the book is really about. we're going to be joined by samuel who is a professor at the university of illinois-chicago. we're going to be joined also by russell roberts who is at george mason university. we're going to look at two different aspects of smith's writing and how it's been interpreted throughout the years. >> we have been able to participate by phone calls and e-mails and tweets. >> that's correct. phone calls, e-mails, we have twitter followers. >> is there a specific hash tag to use? >> it's just at booktv. one word. >> let's take a look at the rest of the week.

what's ahead on wednesday? >> wednesday we're going to look at the current economic situation. we're going to be joined by ann and she's also a author of the book called the "forgetten man" it's a history of the compression. we're also going to be joined by dean baker, recovering from the economic economy. both looking from different angles. >> then on thursday, the focus is on military issue; correct? >> more specifically on afghanistan. we're going to be joined byset jones, he's author "in the graveyard of empire" and also "the author of the "a question of command." >> who's in line for friday? >> friday we're going to talking "silent spring" and looking at ann smith, in regards to the economy, looking at rachel

carson and with regards to the environment, both are talked with circles. we'll be joined by paul dryson. >> it is booktv, primetime all this week. thank you for joining us. >> thank you, bill.

[applause] >> thank you mrs. obama for being here today. we are ready to be your party, we are ready and yes, we can. >> yes, we can. >> yes, we can. enter did you notice that the first lady chose the same color i was wearing for a tie? [laughter] >> go viks. minnesota colors. [laughter] >> check out his tie also.

now tomorrow we're going to look forward to being at the white house. and so it's a packed meeting for us, ladies and gentlemen. i want now like to call on mr. cornet. you know, it's so fitting to have him follow the first lady. because he's leading the way for us on this whole initiative, well, movement. the movement of making our country healthy. >> thank you very much. thank you. >> she would not be nearly so

kind if she knew i was a packer fan and couldn't stand the vikings. but we'll let it go this time. thank you. i am developing a little wit of a complex. for the last 24 hours with our oklahoma city booth on the second floor up there, people have been coming up to me. say mayor, i can't wait to come to oklahoma city, i've never been there. i'm beginning to see i'm the mayor of the lost continent of atlantis. has anybody ever be there? we're right by i-35, i-40, i-44, mayor daily said he was coming, i said route 66. i know one person has been there, that's tom cochran, tom came through. ihowed him around. we have some video tape.

>> this is a very interesting piece of art. do you want to explain? >> i'd love to. if i had any idea. this is art. you can't criticize it. this is a guy, half a guy, and he has this huge ball. i think it's about man's struggles. the idea is he's efforting to push the ball up the steel point. >> you know, it reminds me of a mayor. every morning you have to get up. there's a big thing in front you, sometimes it's not round. but you have to push it. >> i like it. i like where you are going. >> when i'm in oklahoma city, this art is interesting. i normally, one thinks of cowboy hats. i don't own a cowboy hat. we've heard about the tornadoes. >> it's a big city. every once in a while a tornado

will touch. >> and tepee? >> we don't have tepee. >> what about football? >> our football we don't disappointment you with. we're going to dispel a lot of myths when the mayors come in oklahoma city in 2010. a lot of people think of it dry and dusty. we have amongst the highest percentage of rivers in any state in the country. the mayors will get a ride on it. i have my own boat. i'm going to take you on a ride this morning. >> this is impactly like venice. >> you won't know the difference. >> mayor can we take this boat. can we steal it? >> tom, i'm the mayor, relax. we even have a cool horn. >> i just want to do the right thing out here. >> well, i know the police chief. we're now in bricktown. this is the premiere entertainment district in this region of the country. and to thank for it, we have the

hard working citizens of oklahoma city. >> you mean like that guy right over there? >> oh, man. >> hey, you. get up. get up and get a job. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> tom, it started in 1973 when the st.s funded projects, including the canal, the civil center music hall, the bricktown ballpark which is one of the finest, and of course the ford center, which is the home to the newest nba team, the oklahoma city thunder. when the mayor come, they are going to enjoy this along with the urban jewel, the national cowboy hall of fame, and the wonderful oklahoma city museum of art. our mayors will also get a taste of the all right damage about

the indian and cowboy culture. we'll get a flavor for the jazz legends that call oklahoma cit home. and the modern oklahoma city music scene, brimming with talent like the rock band, flaming list, and the families of the mayors will enjoy one the finest. named by magazine as one of the top three family friendly zoos in the country and they'll have the opportunity to row in one of the newst and most exciting among the oklahoma river. finally, the mayors of america will see how we recovered from one of the devastating terrorist attacks. it's been 15 years since. i think you'll find the citizens are oklahoma city are some of the kindest citizens you'll meet. >> these are the land run sculptors. these are 45 that will some day make up the largest series of bronze tattures in the world. >> when is this scheduled to be

three complete it had >> three years ago. it's not completed yet. don't blame the mayor. they are over half way done. we'll be putting them out over the next three years. it depicts the land run. we started in the most unique way. they literally lined up the settlers and a fired off a pistol, they roar aid cross the country side. whether they put down their stake, this was home. >> that sounds like a good way to start a city. >> no, it was horrible idea. our planning department is still paying for that. every piece of property had multiple owners. it showed a pioneer spirit? that our city went from a population of zero to 10,000 in one day. >> then what happened? >> then, they elected and mayor and shot pip >> shot him. that's not. >> they really shot him. in the back. >> oh, i still think it's funny. >> isn't that funny? >> i'm sorry.

i'm sorry. >> well, it happened. [laughter] [applause] >> we are very anxious for y'all to come. as you know, i put the city on a diet two years ago. we all look like super models now. you haven't been there. you don't know any better. one other thing, be sure to bring your family. in plans for the event, we have a number of activities for kids and the husband of wives and mayors. come one, come all. come to oklahoma city mid june and i will see you there. [applause] >> thank you, mick. i know that we will all have a great time in oklahoma city. i'm noblessed to introduce energy secretary steven chu.

he is helping promote a greener more energy efficient environment. he is playing a pivotal role in economic recovery, overseeing the investment in billions of dollars in our funds, including our energy efficiency and conservation block grant. he's a key leader in the administration's effort to set a new direction on how we with address climate protection. this is an area where the efforts of more than 1,000 mayors have both inspired and strengthened national leader who's are now struggling to enact federal climate legislation. our energy block grant program has for the first time forged a new partnership between the federal government and cities and counties throughout the united states. he is bolstering our local initiative on energy and climate protection.

these resources, especially now, have allowed us to continue our progress as we struggle during this recession. and mr. secretary, we need your help. to make sure that our block with grant is funded again this year. [applause] >> it can either be in the jobs bill or the fiscal year 2011 budget, this simply cannot be a one-time appropriation, sir. mayors know that successful transition to a green economy depends on what takes place in the cities and other communities throughout our country. we also know that as its core, this is all about changes human behavior. an area where mayors have proven

to be leaders. secretary chu, thank you for joining us today. we look forward to your remarks. we will take some questions and have a discussion with you. thank you, secretary chu. [applause] >> thank you. it's a pleasure. i was with you before in an earlier meeting, i believe in seattle, and it's a pleasure to be with you today. i want to start by saying that the federal government is actually following in your foot steps. this group of mayors has some climate agreement. and in this agreement, you've urged the state and federal governments to show more leadership to aggressively work at reducing the carbon emissions in the united states. and so i'm happy to say that through the recovery act, the president and his administration are directly supporting your efforts.

and in the near term, we have been investing $80 billion and we see this as a first down payment in order to help the united states transition to a clean energy economy. this $80 billion is creating new jobs immediately. but even more important than the jobs that we so desperately need, it is also investing in a future. the world is moving towards the green energy economy. it's becoming apparent to developing countries, in fact, i've seen the sea chains in country like china. only in the last year or two where the developing countries are saying as well as the developed countries, the pending predictions of what might happen in climate change are too great of a risk. we have to do something about it. but in addition to that, we see that it -- the country that leads in transitions to this greener energy economy will be a country that will prosper by

it. if we lead in going forward and we can, we surely and we surely must, this is a key to our future prosperity. so you've published -- i think it's a 15-point plan. i'm going to remind you of some of the things thaw said and what president obama and we are tried to do. in one of your points, you said the invertor for the operations in the community, i want to take an inventory of that. with that measurement, with you want to set a plan for some targets. the president in signing an executive order that includes the first ever green house gas standards in the federal agency. and we also -- he's also requiring the department of energy to develop public sector for greenhouse gas emissions which can be ultimately used by your local governments, youing in your cities and towns.

and in addition to that, the department of energy is working towards monitoring greenhouse gases both remotely and by proxies so we can also get this on an international stage so that all countries can agree this is what each country is emitting. one you measure it, you can do something about it. you've asked to increase the use of clean alternative energy and the recovery act is doing precisely that. for example, there is now 30% tax credits for renewables. it's able for paying back over the 8 or 10-year period. in order to spur more investment, laws have been changed. so that when in wind far or farm makes the installation, turns on the switch, and beginning to get the tax credit. several instances, those

developers turned around and reinvested the money in more projects and more jobs. in two instances, two companies alone reinvest the over $2.5 billion in new projects, again, directly into jobs. at last similar tax credit that we've started for major clean manufacturing, instead of being paid over a long period of time, the company get it is. they can reinvest the money. it's things like that that we think are desperately needed in order to get back our citizens to work. and we're also making loan guarantees, for the first time since the early 1980s, this is a program authorized in 2005, and so for the first time in 2009, we've made our first loan guarantees. we are upping the pace of which these things are being reviewed. we're trying to drive innovation across the spectrum. it goes from the laboratory, the

national laboratories, universities where the money is invested in various stages. for example, in energy research and develop we have the national laboratories, the national labs, to remind you, are an incredible asset. it is a national lab. and in the history of the national lab, there were 11 employees. more important than that, at the time was director, roughly 3% of the national economy was at that laboratory. okay? and so that compares to the top ten research universities in the country. this is the type of national laboratories are. for an advanced research project agency and energy to invest in really out of the box thinking

where swinging for home runs and that means you are going to strike out sometime. but when you hit some of these home runs, they can really transform the way we can do wisconsin here in the united states. and we stood up this organization, it's a stellar group of people who are in charge of it. and they have gone through the first round of funding. where energy frontier research grants and energy hubs or other things. this is moseley for the benefit of the research are distributed, we see this as moseley a federal responsibility. however, the next step was -- once you do the research in the laboratory or university how do you actually begin to get down to the marketplace? this is the innovation and demonstration phase. we play a very active roll in the department of energy in piloting some of these new technologyies. new technologies, for example,

several cities are -- have invested in smart grid technology that would be installed citywide. you can test how that would with actually lead to better consumer behavior, better distribution of the loading of the energy assets so that one can drive down energy bills. finally, there's the deployment. this this respect, the department of energy backs and we expect at least 50% cost share by the private sector. this is the final stage where we get what comes out of the of the research labs into the marketplace and replaced in the large scale. these are the things we would need in order to solve the energy problem. another thing that you've said is to make energy efficiency a priority in building improvement and retrofitting city facilities. the energy efficient lighting, urging employees to conserve energy and save money. what are we doing with regard to

that? we are -- have $5 billion in the weatherization assistance program. that money goes to the state, admittedly, it has slow in starting some of the states have been done a good job, other states have not been doing a good job. what we have been doing now is we have been working with the state, the governors have been cooperative in trying to get the agencies to create the jobs and to start saving money. there's $3.1 billion in the state energy program, and $3.2 billion in something that goes a lot of it goes directly to you. these are the energy efficiency and conservation blocks grants. these funds are being allocated, they break up into various sectors, energy efficiency, conservation strategy, efficiency programs in buildings and traffic signals and

lighting. and so there's a menu of things, i think the cities, you as mayors have shown a lot of creativity and how you are going to use it. the program is starting, but it's beginning to have impact. for example, in colony, new york, we have a retrofitting heating and cooling systems in key public buildings to save on energy bills. in ohio and many other cities around the cities around the country they are using the money to replace l.e.d. traffic lights, tremendous savings. we have start add web site. what you will find are stories of towns, of people, who are actually getting these. these stories, and i know from being in your earlier meeting, these stories of actually how you get these things going are much more powerful in many ways than just all of the statistics. so we are moving aimpressively

to get the $2.7 billion out. after the applications were due in late june, we then hired a s.w.a.t. team of 83 people to review this. this is 20 person years of work in reviewing the applications and getting out of the door. this is a graft of the commitments we have begin to make. now that we're making these selections, we're getting the money, we need to work together to turn these investments into jobs and into energy safings. the energy savings that saved the people in your cities and towns money will go directly back into your local economies and then create even more jobs. we're doing other things. if you consider the weatherization program, for example, the $5 billion that could weatherize the scale 3/4 to 1 million low-income homes. that's just a pittance if you consider there are 130 million

homes in the united states. of those 130 million, conservatively, you would need to weatherize, you should be perhaps 60, 70 million of those time that is have been built in times thatting didn't appreciate that you could save money by building higher efficiency homes. what we are doing, we set up a program asking for proposals to asking make this a mass-produced system. by that, i mean, if you consider, if you want to weatherize your home and you don't want to do it yourself. now if you are like me, i'm ultra cheap, i do it myself. i do this and that and put the foam on the pipes and seal the windows and doors. but it is a pain. and the hardware sees me returning things that didn't quite work. i get the right thing. many people don't want to do this. but then you have to go out and you have to get a bid from a

contractor, and then another bid because you want to see what the market will bare. you don't know what to do. wouldn't it be wonderful if you knew there's a person that you can trust. you will save money. even if you had to borrow money at a mortgage-type rate of 5 or 6%. paying the interest on that loan will be less than the money you will save on the weather, weatherization on your energy bills. if you had confidence that could be don, there's no doubt. in addition to that, if you could get your whole neighborhood or at least 1/4 to 1/3 of your neighborhood, then the truck that goes and does and the people who blow in the installation, can go one house at a time. and the cost can drop by a lot. perhaps by a factor of two or more. so we are looking to pilot programs like that, to

essentially mass produce weatherization, to make it also a social norm. and to make it easy. it's important that you make it easy. you make it trustworthy. you also in your program said you want to increase the average energy initiate si, and the recovery program is working hard to do that. you've helped displaced more than $2 billion gallons of petroleum since 1993. that's a wonderful achievement. this is a chart that you can't really read from here. but the reason i'm pointing up is to point that -- point out that the energy efficiency secretary cathy joe, are you in the audience? anyway. you should get to know her.

she's wonderful, with energetic, she's brilliant, and her team is very, very committed to trying to help you. so there will be an open house in the michigan room thursday and friday to answer your questions. if you have any questions, or complaints, that perhaps the energy, you know, ecbc is not getting to you in time, or is there some thick that you don't understand, please go and interact with those people. we are trying to be a much more helpful and responsive partner in energy. we mean that. let me close by a few things. let me remind you of this picture that was taken on the first apollo mission that went to the far side of the moon. and last of the orbits, one thes astronauts look the picture. in the picture, it's a very

desolate moon and warm and inviting earth. the takeaway message is there's nowhere else to go. we came all of this way to explore the moon and the most important thing is that we've discovered the earth. now since that time, since 1968, we've also discovered that an unintended consequence of the industrial revolution is that the carbon pollution is changing the destiny of our planet. so it's very important that we mitigate those changes. in your document, you said we need to help educate the public, schools and other jurisdictions, professional association, businesses and industry by reducing global warming pollution. and i think what we need -- we need a lot of things that put us on this path. we need the block grants, we need a lot of the r&d programs,

we need a lot of the tax credits, but we also need something else. we need a long-term signal in the united states that tells businesses or utility companies, power companies that are doing to make 50, 60 $70 a year investment of billions of dollars per power plant that says when you are making these investments, you have to think about where we need to be by mid century and beyond. without that long-term signal, they won't make those investments. right now, there's a lot of money in the sidelines, waiting, when is the united states going to make this move. they know it's going to happen one of these days. but until it happens, they can't go to a commission, bank, anyone. and so it's on the sidelines. when it's on the sidelines, that means, no jobs. so you can play a very important role in transitions in the clean

air energy economy. now the cost, there's a senate bill, waxman-markey bill, there's many estimates. but it's roughly on the order of 30, 40, 50 gents a day per family of four. the cost of inaction is if people move before us, china is investing $100 billion a year in the clean energy. they think a lot of your future prosperity will be tied to the fact that they can lead in the second industrial revolution. so the cost of in action is we will be followers, not leaders. and we will expose our children and grandchildren to unconscionable risk. let me end by saying something to quote martin luther king, having just celebrated his birthday. we are now faced, he said, with

the fact that tomorrow is today. we are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. and an unfolding con none drum of life and history, there's such a thing as being too late. thank you. [applause] mayors, please grab a mic. we have questions for secretary chu? >> yes. >> if you give them a little time, i think they will turn it on. there you go. >> mr. secretary, we all had great anticipation for the energy efficiency conservation block grants.

the cities were very thankful for the award. that's all we have. we don't have any money. i've had to lay off the 25 students that i hired that i told you about in seattle for my conservation corp. they have reached well over 10,000 homes. my carbon with footprint of the city is 4% of the carbon footprint within the boundaries of the city of bridgeport. if i'm going to reduce the carbon, i have to work on behavior modification door to door of the over 96 percent of my carbon footprint. it's greatly disappointed to have all of the enthusiasm to get money from the department of agency and our own money, not your department, then to train the kids to lay them off and still not know when my money is going to get to bridgeport. not only do i want to see it every year, i want to see the

first year. i want hoping you could let me know when i could hire those kids back? >> well, as i said, the next couple of days if you go to that room and talk to cathy and if you don't get fast action, come high me. but we saw -- >> i know you are earnest. it's not just enough for it to make sense. athat have to know -- they have to know it makes a lot of sense. they have to have somebody we trust. we hired kids from the neighborhood to go tell other people in the neighborhood, this is how you save 40% on your utility bill. we want to get the money out. but the cap agencies have never, i don't believe in our area,

ever spent all of the money. now it's six fold times, we want to make sure when this money is here, it gets out. and we are not blamed for spending money that's critically, critically needed. >> i can't speak specifically to your issue. first, let me just say that behavior modification is a huge bart -- part of this. to convince people it's important. and to give them the tools in order to make the changes. to have kids knocking on doors is really great. boy scouts, girl scouts, volunteers, that's part of the energy retrofit program that we're trying to start up in pilots. how do you sell to community that is people on a blog say this is going to make sense. if we all get in together, we can drive the price down.

by a lot. the specifics of your thing, go and talk to the people in the department of energy. cathy, claire, and others. they will work on it. believe me, they -- we meet every other week. and, you know, this is frustrating to us, quite frankly, because sometimes it leaves us and goes somewhere in the states. i don't know -- let us know whether it is. even after we hand it off, we still feel responsible and hold us responsible. it's after the money is spent that we will be satisfied. people go to that meeting in that room. >> secretary chu, can you take one more. >> sandy, new york. one with concern that i have

when we looked at choosing alternative energy sources through utility was that they are charging more if you want to be greener. there is no incentive or ability to level the cost to is that this is done so that you can move in that direction to budgets. the pressure to stay is tremendous when you don't have the money to pay for more greener alternative fuel. is there anything the federal government can do to work with states with the utilities, the authorities to make sure that our options are affordable and are blending so that we are not paying a premium to alternative

fuel? >> well, yes, there are several things. any few industry unless it is more revolution is more money. it takes a while to drive the cost down. in all of the renewable energy if you look at wind, solar, both of those have actually, the cost have gone down by a factor of 10 over the last 20 years. wind is getting close. solar, it's still more expensive. biofuels are more money. part of is it deploying and getting out there in scale. another part of is it research. another part is -- if you look towards the future, you talk about transportation and fuel, right now it's low, but every

projections i've seen, all of the things that are saying, in the coming decades, the cost of oil will go up. it's going to fluctuate, but it will go up. because just supply and demand. most the reserves are actually offshore. and the demand is higher. you have to bank on fuels being more expensive. in the mean time, we want technology to drive down the other options. but that's all we can do. but in the end, it is a choice that cost. if you want to say can i have new technology, meetly, it's

hard. research has in the passed handed us some real game changing solution. i think it will. because it's no necessary as well. :

right now in voluntary programs if you want to sign on and say i want my energy to be green i agree it's higher but that's not on talking about in these clean energy portfolio standards. they say the entire company has this and then the rates will adjust accordingly. >> thank you. >> mr. secretary, can you just take one more? >> very quickly. >> richard kaplan, when we started receiving a block grant on every radner came out because we have the best products like whatever it may be and the problem was there's no common measurement of the technology, it's so new. i'm asking whether the department finishes establishing measurements and assets when we compare elie d., what the heck and whenever maybe. >> yes and that is an important

issue. if you're over sell a product it will backfire ended again in your position you saying, well, which vendor to i really trust. so what we're trying to do is there are standards and we will hold the people to those standards and for the first time in history of the department of energy, we've been doing applied standards for a while but we've never enforced them. [laughter] and restarted to enforce them and we probably got suited and they held -- they said you are right and applied solar panels so what we're doing is we are going to lighting and even be developing standards to evaluate building illusions as well so we're going to expand this to give you -- both on the energy sparked and also on this refrigerator, for example

actually satisfied by the legal standards of the minimum energy efficiency, but we are trying to do this. and again, i recall we probably all have these stories but i was one of the early adopters with the light bulbs. didn't quite last as long as the box said in the car wasn't as nice as you would have liked so that actually delay the adoption i think in my opinion for a year to. had they just worked a little harder and made them really make sure that you gained one and of the box it will last 5,000 hours. >> think your march. [applause] >> coming up tonight beginning at 8:00 o'clock >> we're going to look at adam smith's wealth of nations, this book was published in 1776.

it's often cited and discussed in economic circles and we're going to try to get to an understanding of what the book is really about, joined by sandals licensed or who is a professor at the university of illinois chicago and going to rejoin also by russell roberts who is at george mason university and they're going to look at two different aspects of smith's writing and work and how it's interpreted through these years. >> our viewers on booktv will be able to participate by phone calls and e-mail direct. >> as caris, phone calls and out over 9,500 twitter horst. >> is there a specific twitter -- tagged? >> id is f booktv one word. >> in that is tonight at eight eastern. >> at the world economic forum in switzerland canadian prime minister stephen harper outlined his priorities in the upcoming g-8 and g-20 summits. canada will host the meetings in june. this is about a half hour.

>> [applause] >> thank you very much, a professor of. it is great to be here and have this opportunity to contribute to your discussions on some of the vital issues that are confronting the world today. and some of them are complex and they may at times seem abstract, but for ordinary men and women everywhere the substance of what we talk about here translates into simple reality like komen, food on the table, where a better life for their children. so is an important debate, one that we're delighted to be part of. i should also like to welcome some other members of our government, my government here today from my friends and colleagues, finance minister jim clarity is here, minister of international trade, peter, ambassador saad teeten and also

governor of the bank of canada, mark carney, welcome to all of you and the other canadian get -- delegates here today. [applause] with. >> i would also like the professor to take a moment to offer my personal congratulations to you on this the 40th annual gathering of your creation, the world economic forum, you chose as its motto committed to improving the state of the world. i would observe that you who have set such a lofty goal have more reason to be pleased with their accomplishments. two have conceived of the need for such an institution as this required in sight to have established to the amendment put to have then nurtured as a podium from which business and political leaders could nudge public policy by adjusting their peers from around the world, that is a formidable achievement and professor, this gathering salutes you.

[applause] circumstances have something in common in the world falling 1971. economy than were in turmoil, the institutions governing international finance for failing the test of the crisis, and wherever one looks around the world there was trouble. and so it is today. the latest crisis hit the world as the world was grappling already with enormous challenges, large current account balances come aging populations and its fans country's violence, terrorism, and, of course, the internal problems of poverty and underdevelopment. there's always something, but we must never stop trying to improve the state of the world. therefore in june when canada hosts the leaders of the the g-8

and g-20 resplendently our goal is to work with our progress toward practical and durable solutions. in the next few minutes i want to share some of the principles that old guide the government of canada and hopefully the discussions at the summit's under our theme, recovery and new beginnings. let me first talk about the g-20 itself. which and pittsburgh will officially designated as the world's premier forum for economic cooperation. in that role, the g-20 will stand or fall on its ability to demonstrate in the months to come of the san cooperative and spirits is shown in the past year. now i am hopeful beginning in washington in november 2008 g-20 leaders have responded to the system of financial collapse and the global recession with quicken, decisive and coordinated action.

at the london summit in 2000 -- april 2009 these measures were expanded with particular emphasis on the most level states so that in pittsburgh the seeds of a new era of balanced sustainable growth been planted. if i may be indulged in a personal recollection, when i saw at the washington summit made an enormous impression on me. nation whose interests have often been at odds premonitions with different traditions of governance, rivals even more remedies brown and sons addressing common problems of the common will. in this global the economy they recognize that a flood in calling it one would soon swamp them all. so even though 28 some leaders all represent sovereign state, they agreed to, and synchronized actions to charge the same course toward a color waters.

ideological differences are set aside, police were not raise, i would say this -- if you have arise from another planet youtube never have guessed which nations have spent decades mired in hostility. he might call of the fellowship of the the light pole, the ladies and gentlemen in that brief parting of the veil i saw world leadership at its best, a glimpse of a hopeful future. what and where we act together for the good of all, the world we have been trying to build lives since 1945. the world we want for our children and grandchildren. shows it can be done if we act together and we call this -- i call this enlightened sovereignty. and i believe our understanding in washington just in washington allow us to avoid the cataclysms that otherwise really would have come to pass. but in agreement to nafta is

just a start, it is acting on the agreements that matters. and so when the g-20 resumes in toronto, the discussion should be less about new agreements and accountability for existing ones, less about the lofty promises and then a real results, less about narrow self-interest and sovereignty's name, then expanded view of mutual interest in which there is room of for all to grow and prosper. in 1970 than the natural extension of enlightened self-interest. native [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue] to be succinct, the real test of the g-20 going forum, is that it develops and sustain some of its members a sense of a shared

responsibility toward in the global economy. for while other markets often power to generate and widely distribute wealth, itself even and we also know from history that our kids to do need governments. for the new global economy and the teetwenty is today what we have. now, as we work through the final stages of the recession and embrace recovery, there are three critical areas where g-20 actions have been and will remain vital. financial sector reform from the stimulus programs and global trade and growth strategies. let me begin with reform of the financial sector from reform of financial sector regulation. this has been a focus from washington because after all that sector's failures and the transmission of this contagion globally are widely acknowledged to have triggered the crisis. now as many every now and professor you were kind enough to mention once again canada was not a per of the problem.

canadian banks have maintained a healthy leverage ratios and largely avoided exposure to toxic assets. no major canadian brains of institutions have failed and none required bailouts from the government. as a consequence, canada now has one of the largest banking sectors in the world and it is entirely from entirely in the private sector. i should just note that reputable observers have recognized this canadian and. as you said professor this year as last, in your own emmet organizations the world economic forum and more recently investors service both rank canada's banks as the world's soundest. the international monetary fund has commented that, let me quote -- that canada's financial sector has shown remarkable stability amid the global turbulence, things in good part to strong supervision and regulation.

this is undoubtedly part of the reason why canada took on the co-chairman ship a financial sector regulatory reform at the in first g-20 in washington. canada has maintained good active systems, prudent and measured regulation. i should just be clear, we do not claim that our system is perfect. the lack of a single national securities regulator is an obvious hole, the vast majority of our promises are now working with us to fill that gap. we also been obliged to tighten the criterion for never in mortgages insurance so there are things we can and will do but overall the performance of this sector during the crisis showcase the effectiveness of canada's approach. and not through our g-20 chairmanship this year we want to urge the adoption of similar regulatory practice is globally. in this regard i believe the canadian system generally does two things that should guide the

future of work in this area. first, we must promote national regulation sufficiently strong to avoid repetition of the kind of crisis we experienced last year. we also believe that such national systems should be subject to international peer review in order to enhance transparency and reduce risk for the global economy. anything less would expose every economy to needless risk. in fact, it inadequate regulation is not addressed, i believe that the consequences could actually be worse than before the crisis. it after a time of renewed stability will institutions are able to return to the irresponsible practices that caused the crisis, which they have learned? i would have learned a very bad lesson. that is that reckless behavior can be engaged in because

national governments will ultimately backstop the consequences. and that ladies and gentlemen would be a very dangerous precedent. with [applause] one [applause] obviously than financial sector regulation must be tackled and it must be adequate. but second, canada also believes must have the right purposes and must not and be excessive. now, let me just say, first of all, that i understand why there are calls for such approaches in some circles. situations very different than canada's, where big bank failures resulted in public bailouts, where the public interest the pain yet those who accosted seem to emerge unscathed, there is understandably public anger and demands for tough or even a

retaliatory action. in canada because our situation is being so different, we don't face such demands of public opinion is much more reflective about what is needed. our approach to financial sector regulation in canada of historic claim much more activist than in many other countries has not micromanage the affairs of a complex industry. its purpose is to ensure transparency in the marketplace, helps link risk performance and reward, and encourage a culture a prudent behavior of focused on the long term. so one [speaking in native tongue]

so let me be clear, through the g-20 and we will be encouraging strengthened financial sector regulation and improved coordination between regulators but canada will allow us to go down the path of excessive and arbitrary or punitive regulation of its financial sector. [applause] canada has a well regulated the free market economy with a private financial sector of enormous strength, we intend to build on that in a bandage, we intend to see the financial sector in canada grow, and we intend canada's global position in that industry to get stronger yet in the future. the second ongoing by g-20 policy debate want, policy priority would has been to drive globally corning stimulus

measures both monetary and fiscal. we believe it is important to stay the course, but only for now. it remains my conviction ny that fiscal expansion and in his government spending and increased fiscal deficits were necessary during the recession. in fact, with rapidly falling output and employment and interest rates near ciro, economic theory has been very clear how this was the only option. the temptation today, to see hopeful signs of recovery everywhere in small things is understandable, so then it would be the wish to declare recovery here and abandon last year's commitments to these expense of public investments. we believe that would be a mistake. the truth is that despite the g-20 good work during the last 15 months, the recovery is aimed mile wide but only inch deep. in job creation remains very tentative.

[speaking in native tongue] but while it is absolutely too soon to abandon stimulus programs, it is no longer to early to start thinking about a strategy to exit them. because we all know the long-term risks of a prolonged government spending of this magnitude, renewed inflation, rising interest rates, crowding out of investment, prolong the sluggish economic performance. this view informs our economic planning in canada. canada will complete its two year economic action plan of its fiscal stimulus measures in support of the recovery, support of the economy, we shall faithfully meet all the promises we made an earlier g-20 meetings. at the same time our next budget

will outline a path to reduce the deficit and return to balance budgets in the medium term. be doing this i should add that, we will be doing this i want to talk about this canadian advantage, we will be doing this from levels a deficit and debt that are by comparison with other advanced industrialized economies quite modest. we have the lowest level of indebtedness in the g-7 by far and when the recession ends are relative levels of indebtedness will still be lowered by an even wider margin. that is because canada paid off debt aggressively during the growth years. now, in passing, as an economist, i must observe that this particular recommendation that john maynard keynes seldom acted upon vigorously as his permission, i would say that in this regard kissing is and is a

bit like communism according to those who advocate and neither properly attended. [laughter] so the us government's borrowing times are difficult because they must and then there are more when times are easy because they can. but instead true keynesian that we're accused of being, our government paid $38 million of canada's national debt between 2006 and 2009 and that incidentally is what allowed us to lower taxes in canada. we believe is important that taxes be low and that tax reductions be sustainable. that way they become a permanent form of six -- fiscal stimulus and in the environment of falling debt we are able to lower taxes of all kinds in fact canada has already the lowest tax rate on new business investment in the g7. investors take notes, canada is and will remain open for

business. finally let us talk about global trade in growth strategies. i suspect every single person in this room, i suspect every single person in this room understands that the growth in global trade has been largely responsible for wealth creation worldwide in the past generation. and therefore enhancing trade in resisting protectionism is both essential to the world economy and to the just cause of raising billions of people from poverty. the g-20 has said this and every single meeting, of course, there have been national action's, maybe to make him a bed to track from hagel. even so we have thus avoiding anything like the protectionism that turn off the stock market crash of 1929 into a decade-long depression. the in camera that we have tried and continued to be leaders in promoting free trade and open markets, are stimulus package i should mention did not raise

tariffs, it lowered that. unilaterally i might add since 2006. we have concluded free-trade agreements with eight additional countries and we are engaged in six other negotiations including with the european union. we will continue to promote trade and continue to resist protectionism and to reduce and eliminate tariff barriers. however at pittsburgh last year the g-20 that went beyond merely advocating for trade in against protectionism. as a basis for promoting global growth. we also established what we chris in the framework for strong and sustainable and balanced growth. much of what the framework prescribes, texas and the right direction. i speak especially of consensus that the macro level on the causes of recession in the middle commitment among g-20 members to bring a policy. however, this is where g-20

partners must truly embrace light and views of sovereign behavior. otherwise we will pursue strategies inevitably that do not produce michelin plant is and therefore cannot be sustained. it might drop their tariffs i will be mine, or lecture currency traded market rates we will keepers' under value. we should know from the terrible experience of the 1930's that strategy is that make it difficult for somebody to do business inevitably make it difficult for everybody. so i say, a new options routed --. [applause] i say notion's rooted in a near of u.s. sovereignty and national self-interest must be reconsidered. we cannot do business as though for one to have more another must have lost. that is not true, it is not just, and it cannot be the path we tank.

our ambition and the necessary condition for success of the g-20 is moving forward must be a shared belief that the rising tide of recovery must blip all boats, not just some. this is the exercise of sovereignty and its most enlightened and i don't believe by the way -- let me just say as an aside -- i don't believe by the way that this is all about the structure of global institutions. it is more about a matter, more a matter of attitude. some words of the former u.s. secretary of state, cornell whole, as you know he was a driving force of the creation of a postwar international institutions that are still with us today, the u.n. for example, and the world bank. it except in the nobel peace prize in 1945 for his work, he had this to say about international institutions -- i like this quote because it's similar to my father to me for

many years. to be sure, no piece of social machinery, however well constructed can be attractive unless there is packed with a will and determination to make it work. want [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue] it doesn't matter what global structures we divide for r neutral betterment of we do not have the red global attitudes, they will not work. ladies and gentlemen with the g-20 necessarily focused on the economy, there does remain in our view an important role for the g-8 group of nations in on economic matters in promoting democracy and development, peace and security. in this troubled world, we clearly recognize how much else there is that requires

international cooperation. terrorism, it threatens all of us, piracy has returned to strategic seaways, climate change disproportionately threat is the people's least capable of adapting to eds. and all the tensions between the older nuclear states that largely dissipated the spread of nuclear weapons in new actors allows the world no relief from anxiety. these are all complex daunting threats that cannot be matched by any one country working alone. they require a close cooperation of friends and like-minded allies. on these the g-8 can show leadership. as an example, let us close with something where progress is possible if we're willing. it concerns the link between poverty and the appalling mortality among mothers with small children in the third world. did gino that every year over half a million women die in pregnancy in nearly 9 million

children die before their fifth birthday? the numbers should shock and grief us. far too many lives and futures are being lost in into the world's shame so many have been lost for want to relatively simple a health solutions all within the reach of international community. opera in the keys and laffer numbers is to give them clean water, widely available vaccines, or the most basic treatment against infection. that so little has been done is tragic, it is not just about words on a page by israel, however, real suffering. real people dying. can invent a system common commitment seriously including those made at the g-8 and that's why, for example, we have double aid to africa as promised and we're on track with our commitment to double international assistance this year. so what is required to fly to this particular problem of human misery? it is merely the same unity of

purpose that we can find within ourselves readily enough when disaster strikes as a recently did in haiti or as we can into when the problem is one of trade finance or the economy. we must find that unity of purpose. [speaking in native tongue] that is why as president of the g-8 canada will have an initiative to approve the health of women and children in the world's most will verbal regions. [applause] ..

courage to accountability. fudgy 20 nations must deliver on the commitments they made, the group of eight must live up to the promises. accountability, i believe, ladies and gentlemen is the prerequisite for the progress. as the host for the g-8 and g20 meetings this june canada will use its leadership role to focus on these challenges, and i look forward to corroborating closely with our international partners as we continue to support the

economic recovery and charged new beginnings for humanity worldwide. thank you very much for your attention. [applause] [inaudible conversations] here's more from the world economic forum in switzerland. a conversation about fighting hunger. microsoft chairman bill gates joined leaders from tanzania and vietnam plus the ceo of archer-daniels midland and dupont. this is just over one hour.

[inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon, everybody. thank you for joining today. we are going to talk about how to feed the world and we think that issue. we know that a billion people today suffer from malnutrition. 80% of those are in the agricultural sector. so it is probably the single most important issue that faces the world today and at the same time it is probably the single most neglected issue at forums like this so it's good to see the world economic forum paying

so much attention to food production and organizing a special world food program. it's a big change and about time that happened but today you can see we have got a panel of experts who can guide us somewhere towards first stating the problem, what exactly is at, then we plan to do, going into what are the possible solutions like innovation, technology, trade etc and then we plan to end with what our certain goals that we should aim at, big bowls, two or three big bowls we should a match. the format of the next one hour will be each stage when we take up the topic after we've talked about but few minutes i will ask for questions from the floor on

that particular topic. so it won't be -- all the questions won't be at the end but half of this entire program will be devoted to questions from the floor. short and crisp questions, please. let's get a first introduction remarks with the problem we are facing and we start with the prime minister of tanzania. >> in tanzania we use the minister -- in india and do use president. [laughter] >> but of course it is a daunting challenge to be even the task of defining the problem. but all i can say is that indeed

there is a huge new challenge of the feeding the world today. a billion people undernourished and we've 6.1 or 6.3 people, billion people, and there will be 9.2 billion. india is a big challenge. but beginning with that i can say that we can feed ourselves. in the present levels of population and by 2050 -- 2015. why do i say so? there's plenty for agriculture. number two, despite the odds, but the conditions are permissive. moreover, there is plenty of water, sizable water resources

for the agriculture. and third, technology and skills are available. so on the basis of these i believe we can feed the population now and in future. what needs to be done is to overcome the constraints of the dtca production and protective the to the cup. -- productivity. >> the key problem is productivity -- >> and production. >> by the prime minister, the president but the premise -- the minister to speak. >> [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: ladies and gentlemen, i would like to discuss the topic -- ladies and gentlemen i wish to discuss the topic of how we can secure

security for the world today in a more rapid way and sustainable way with the three conditions, first of all to secure the availability. second to ensure the stability in who supplying, to ensure the ability of food to the people. i will discuss these two topics. thank you. >> thank you very much. if i could ask now patricia woods, the culture of the world economic forum, and also chairman, president and chief ceo. >> thank you. it is from my perspective as a global leader in agriculture as

well as the ceo of adm that we see the growing demand that the president described as a key issue longer-term, so it's not only that the population will grow by 50% by the middle of the century but the demand of the cultural products will double because as people become more prosperous the eat a better buy it, there's demand for car agriculture. i'm similarly optimistic agriculture can fill those needs. and in the short term i think agriculture has a keefer role to play in the economic recovery because as many know, agriculture and of course we don't eat agriculture, we eat food but agriculture contributes to the reduction of poverty twice as much, some people think even four times as much as investment and other sectors. so eckert culture with its effects across, up and down the chain has the ability to

alleviate poverty so in defining the problem, i think it is not only the longer term of feeding a growing population and providing for those needs, the growing demand for agricultural products but in the short term the need for economic recovery investment in agriculture and infrastructure and technology will help provide some of the solutions to that immediate problem as well. >> with food security we have the short-term issue which is the billion people and back in 2007 we saw a middle class by its were demanding more food as was said that the prices spiked up and we had a terrible problems and some of the responses to that even made it worse. the long run a problem is that popular population increase times the food intensity and to achieve that is a winter require

a lot of innovation. even just spreading the way things are done today across the world, that alone won't do it. you have to have it knew how productive seeds and avoid a lot of pathogens that are going to come along and go after the crops comes only by being optimistic about the innovation piece and funding it both saw the world as a whole and a lot of specific funding for the developing countries, that's the only way we will meet this challenge. >> and the bill and melinda gates foundation is donating a lot and working together with the world economic forum and the program. in fact a little anecdote i was interviewing bill gates some time ago and said could you do a sound check at the beginning and he said one, to, three, four and he said 1 billion, 2 billion, 3 billion -- [laughter] if you can say that is the amount that he's donating now for the world food program.

that's great. [applause] >> thank you. >> ellen coleman? >> im ellen coleman of the dupont company. it's going to be a key element of filling the gap ayman vv production of food between now and the year 2015. technology alone isn't willing to be enough. to read the industry can produce great yielding seeds and technology to protect it from insects and other issues but until we can figure out how to educate the farmer so they are using their right combination and the weather conditions, until we can get collaborations' research alliances, collaborations on market access so the farmers can get their goods to market and a grass-roots way because it has to ochered farmer by farmer, and

i think the three of them and, innovation, education and collaboration and bill would add something i think are the major elements of reaching that gap -- bridging that gap. >> and the one and only from the world bank. >> thank you. i don't know about one and only. but thank you. i think that we are thinking feeding the world, you know, we need to think of three or four judges even if we are able to produce we have to think of one. the fact that the other sources of demand for the food products there are competing with food now we see that a quarter of the u.s. food based production goes for espinel. other countries are using food [inaudible] so things we have to think perhaps bigger because you have the sources of competition. you also have to think of things like impact of climate change of

food production, the volatility and the ability of food price is going forward and what this will be. i think that as the world changes and as income grows we also have a shift in terms of the demand for food. people were demanding higher value products even in developing countries and you have to think how do we work with small farmers to meet that kind of demand? and then we also have to think of the dynamics of the movement's and how we manage that as more people migrate to the urban areas so these are some of the challenges and we are thinking how to feed the world we must focus on these as well if we are to succeed. >> we have to think of -- we have a huge problem ahead and to look as some solutions let's start with basic issue everybody talked about and what is the problem of yield if increase productivity. what kind of innovations we've

already seen one green revolution and some countries haven't gone through that yet. so there can be an interesting change and the countries that haven't been through the green revolution to go through that now but those that have already been through at will and other innovations we need now like should i say the world a genetically modified food? is a good thing, that thing? bill gates, innovations we need to have another big jump in productivity and fields. >> effort is the main place where the benefits of the green revolution haven't been felt yet and it's the third variety of crops and partly the variety of weather conditions and that this issue of getting the education and and puts including fertilizer and those are the challenges and so there has been a new group, the african green

revolution organization headed by kofi annan that is gathering money and bringing together expertise and working with the dealers, working with feith seat makers to get those after so there is some hope we can get quite a bit and in the meantime we have to invent things that go even beyond and it comes down to the yield. the yield has to be dramatically higher than they are today across a huge number of crops. >> are you for or against genetically modified sood? >> what our foundation is doing is we are working with partners and dupont pioneer on some new things and adm on some cocoa growing things. some of these are traditional breeding and some are transgenic. in parallel we are funding scientific expertise and africa,

so when three or four years from now if things go as expected there are crops with big benefits, drought resistance to the transgenic approach can do better than any other approach. each country can decide what are the benefits to them and what are the risks, what's known about it? safety, licensing and things that would make them hesitant, and then they will on their own be able to make that decision. the likelihood that the safety profile will be okay and there will be beneficial i hope that works out because it is a tool particularly for disease resistance where you can put in a new machine called an interference gene for a particular op problem. it would be a help and you are on the verge of starvation of times every tool that's safe and

appropriate you at least one to look into. >> ellen kullman, dupont does provide genetically yielded food as well as other varieties. are you facing a lot of resistance through some of the edges of interesting approach and are you confident gm is the future? >> i think that if you are going to resolve problems like drought resistance you were going to have to use genetic modification to get there. i can't think of a product in terms of genetically modified seed that has been more tested and thoroughly vetted many of the countries that currently allowed to grow. i think in 2008 we surpassed 2 billion acres globally or biotech crops are grown so there's a lot of data and information and there's a lot of benefits to it but i think that bill is right. each country if they said a sign ms based transparent regulatory

framework, then the industry can work with those countries in order to bridge the gap in the productivity that is needed to fill the food gap. >> so in vietnam what is your approach to increasing productivity and yield with a genetically modified food? at chollet there is genetically modified food and a genetically modified other crops like cotton, etc.. >> [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: before addressing the question i would like to touch on how to ensure global food security. ladies and gentlemen, security is not [inaudible]

-- and entire world. across the globe in a more sustainable manner. [inaudible] speed i just wanted to ask in vietnam you've been successful in increasing productivity, in vietnam you've been successful in increasing productivity. how did you do that without using any sort of genetically modified food?

>> [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: i think that to ensure the food security first we need to ensure good distribution channels that we must ensure the accessibility of the people to that food and each country must make its own efforts with international assistance and ensure food security for the community. productivity is to increase the output.

to help enhance productivity and output -- >> so you're not against a genetically modified food, just to get your -- >> [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: we do not oppose [inaudible] it is not necessary for us because we have productivity of 15 tons. we could provide [inaudible] we are still self-sufficient in production. >> can i just ask the audience here, the purchase to genetically modified food, those against totally, those who are in favor and those who say if as long as i know it i don't mind, i will take the choice. can i have a phrase of hands

have many people here are against genetically modified to it -- modified food? how many of you are in favor? who would actually eat genetically modified? that's about 40%. and those who say i would like to at least know the full information. that's the other 45%. okay. thank you. patricia, there are things besides genetically modified to come in different ways of increasing productivity which we see as the big problem. what would they be? >> maybe i will comment on that with showing that there has been a community here at davos this and some time the last seven months working on what we call the future vision of agriculture , and part of the discussion this morning we had a

very lively discussion that included the president and clear takeaways from that was that increasing productivity is very necessary but not sufficient. we also talked about investment in the entire value chain or entire eckert cultural train particularly true infrastructure, transportation, storage, getting even the basics of roads and trucks and getting crops to market or getting them to the people that need to eat them. so the idea of not just productivity but things beyond increasing yield such as even reducing post harvest waste which is something we could take on today as we've heard in several sessions of the crops that are grown and are wasted or left to spoil because there's not an investment infrastructure, because they

don't have the ability to get to market is as much as 20%, i know in your country you took it at that. so it to actually make more efficient use of the crops today as well as not waste what is grown i think is an important part of it in closing the gap between -- >> that's a very important point, we have officials in india about children suffering from malnutrition and these 15 million tons of food stock, far more than we need from security spt said the malnutrition and fat rats. they don't quite -- it's a stark picture. >> maybe one more point, too, investment in innovation related to production as agriculture, production of crops is about 95%. only 5% is going to the post harvest innovation ids sold more work to be done. we are working with the university of california davis

who has an institution associated with us so again more emphasis in that area. >> president kikwete come how is tanzania looking at increasing yield? what stage of the agricultural cycle are you at? >> we have a host of interventions because one of the things we are looking at is changing the technology. our agriculture is, technology is the in all, 65%, so we are now trying to see how to mechanized agriculture. as i said it is only 10% of africa is agriculture is to improve ascent by [inaudible] and thailand, thailand has more

directors than the whole of sub-saharan africa put together. so one of the things we are doing is to mechanized agriculture as one. the second thing we are engaged with is increase the proportion of the agriculture. right now is only 4% of the agriculture in africa is irrigated and 20%. so we need to get there. there's another challenge. the other is the use of the hockey yielding seeds. we are not talking about the gm getting to the seed that in the vietnam they get used. we are using the traditional seeds, so here is the question of investing in agricultural research, which we are now

living and second is the possibilities for the seed -- so they can get higher seed. >> the same mechanization, irrigation and hybrid seeds. >> and fertilizers. the average for tanzania is gnawing kilos per hectare. south africa is 50 and in putting the motherland's is more than 500 per hector. so these and other accommodations, lack of the pesticides and the challenge of post harvest loss so it is a set of combinations and looking at the marketing systems, the farmers produce, the markets are not assured. the prices are again not favorable. so to increase productivity is again a combination of

mechanization, irrigation, high-yield seeds, getting fertilizer, pesticides, organizing. but again the biggest challenge we have is in applying to the farmers said the extension of the recess is a question of training the livestock offices. so it is a combination and then as we look at the infrastructure -- sprick countries have been through this so you have a path you can follow. and we've talked about the yield increased and food stock being wasted or around the world. before i go to the audience, another big issue and solution which we need -- some other problem we need to solve besides these two. >> there's one problem i want to talk about in terms of production, and that is addressing the right of the

people who produce. studies that are done at the world bank find that often women are not the ones. women do the bulk of the production. we must put that on the table but very often the extension advice and the targeting of new ideas don't go to them and it's shown if you make sure those who are actually working in growing the crops are the ones receiving these. you can get up to 20% more yield in some cases by working with them, so we have to put that on the table. women must be at the center of as the african countries -- sprick the highest return is investment in human capital of women. >> in addition to that i don't think we should get fixated on the production alone. i want to come back to something said in terms of distribution. what we talked about this morning. you can find in the same country there is enough food but you

can't get it from one part of the country to another. so most of the time we talk of increasing output but many times you find farmers who produced that the country can't get it from one part -- and the world wide sometimes it's not the fact that there is a shortage but trade barriers and protectionism and feeling of insecurity about feeding your own population. also stop one countries from sending. look what happened during the food crisis. we found food markets were very thin. you couldn't get food -- some countries had 5 million tons of surplus wheat and in the end it was able to send some out of the market and prices began to come down so we must look at those factors as well. >> can we have a question from the audience? there is one in the back on the left.

>> from the university of michigan, we hear a lot of talk about challenges requiring solutions and a lot of talk about innovation. what we don't hear so much about is how to get from point a to point b so the question is how do you get the innovations out of the house of innovations to people in the field that need to use them? >> let me give an example where the pieces come together. there's a lot of these institutes. the cj orie r institutes that do basic crop research and the green revolution worked largely came all of the fact that they got funding and worked for the organization's one of those were cleary, it's the based in the philippine, it's called the royce organization and if the

royce was flooded it would allow to stay there and when the flood would go we would keep growing whereas normally fuel flooded the rice just dies but they were able to take this gene and put it in different varieties very rapidly and now the poorest royce farmers on the irrigation rice farmers are getting huge benefits from that and it's used not transnet but the latest technology that is the sequencing in order to understand they were taking just this one characteristic from this one rice that could withstand submergence and putting into the high yield of four varieties people like and so you were just getting a good coming from that so it is a great model however it is a disease or drought resistant or salt tolerance almost a dozen things we need to go after, you

can move quickly at an end of the research, get it through the national organizations and promote to the farmers which is an extension excellence. this one india did a great job and it's actually now done in africa as well. >> these examples that success examples if republics to know them and they are disseminated well. there's a question on the left. >> a large percentage perhaps majority of the world's farmers don't have secure legal rights to the land they farm and without that, they don't have the appropriate incentives and can also access credit easily. this is true for the women farmers. what role does getting that wright's wright have in feeding the world? >> anybody particularly want to take that? >> the person we funded at a

couple of organizations that are completely focused on that issue and there's reason to progress being made. various country by country. is that an issue or not? >> is that an issue to land rights and they don't have rights to land and in secure and they can't invest as much as they would otherwise? >> [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: every farmer in vietnam produces on their own land. they have the right to use the land that it is to develop agricultural production. >> it is true if people don't

have to land rights it becomes impossible for them to get bank loans. what we've been trying to do in the country is to make it easy for people to get land. when we use the normal system, it's very expensive to take the surveyors to the funds so what we've been trying to do of course this is through 40 felt. we have been in the villages, we create the land registry. so we have now been training -- [inaudible] how to use a gps so somebody would come to my fund.

so, through this process [inaudible] they have a complete map of the allocation. the thing that we've done now and of allegis have been empowered to issue land certificates and the certificates issued by the villages are recognized. by the government they then are transferred to the national -- >> argue computerizing this? >> now there are no more stages of computerizing, so the village level when they computerize of course it is a question of building the capacities from a poor country like ours it becomes difficult but it's one of the areas given priority to. we of nine southern villages and now almost about 3,000. so we are doing this, and it is already begun to pay dividends.

in some of the villages come in some of the district swear they have land certificates they use it to get land from the banks. at a member district three months ago to issue the certificates and then i was taught already the farmers have $5 million in bank loans for the agricultural activities. so it has helped to do it easier at the village level. >> can i ask you, we move on to the prices, the second biggest issue which we find farmers don't get rewarding prices, it's not a profitable area to be and so there's less investment. one of the factors we see in the developing countries is the urban middle class is so vocal and politically strong food prices are kept low to keep them

happy and the farmers lose out of course in india, since we have elections so often and 65% of the voters live on farms, they do have to consider those votes as well. but the other issue is what the west is doing on prices. the huge subsidies in europe and america to keeping prices down which means developing countries farmers can't get a decent price for their produce. if the subsidies were removed, prices went up and farmers got a good return to their investment, within that help productivity? how do we ensure farmers get better prices? >> one thing that i think someone said earlier is when it comes to food productivity and supporting one's communities and economies associated with food production countries tend to look inward that sometimes flies in the face of world trade

issues and one who believes in global trade. it doesn't mean you always find open trade even though you may believe in at so one thing about pricing that might help in this perspective is that even when you see high prices, the correction for high prices is generally the high price because it drives more supply. what we saw with their recent high prices and maybe the answer is that we are in a period of volatility which will be with us for ever so that means high and low, but high prices drove farmers in the most productive regions of the world to plant more so supplies is increasing and one thing about agriculture is it renews itself every harvest cycle. >> do you think the arrests should stop subsidizing farmers? >> a kilby continued discussion with open trade. >> everything else, but this is

-- >> i still believe in it. i believe countries will continue -- >> patricia raised the issue of volatility, not just prices but the risk of farming, the risk of the weather, the risk of the prices both out of control of the farmer. how do you combat the double problem of the low prices and high risk and farming? >> well, i think that we have to be thinking of agriculture differently. bill gates said we should think of innovation innovation and i agree, innovation is not only in the area of production but also innovation is in the area of financial instruments that could be used to help farmers and countries manage the volatility, and i think we need to think about that. now we've been working at the world bank with the swiss

insurance and we did a small scheme in malawi to help them manage the risk of drought and flood and so one whereby if there is an occurrence they can get a payment of back which they can then use to help the farmers. we must think of those kind of instruments even in haiti today -- insurance based products that can be used to help farmers -- >> how do you compensate farmers for this high risks of a bad monsoon or drought? the riskiness of the farming? >> [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: i give them the certificate of land and they can

use that certificate and to secure bank loans and when we suffer from losses they will get the subsidy from the government, assistance and from the government. now why would like to mention to increase the yield one important issue is we need international community to become a lamented with the maximum areas [inaudible] the new subsidies, and only then can we encourage countries to produce and enhance productivity

[inaudible] so that they worked together to finalize. and we finalize the bill of round a good condition. >> ellen kullman, this is a request saying can you stop subsidies and open up trade and agricultural products, d.c. that happening? can there be a target five years, ten years? particularly america, a huge subsidies. >> these issues have been with us quite a while and i fear there is no easy answer, that it's going to take a while to work it out and that is where i go back to productivity and technology because i think part of the issue is getting more equalization in terms of copper on the world in certain crops. we have a huge disparity if you look at sub-saharan africa and acre produce a 17% of what an acre in the united states

produces and when you have that kind of disparity you get the protectionist tendencies so i think working on equalizing that is one of the areas that can help in terms of stabilizing from the standpoint of countries turning inward and looking to protect themselves. >> bill gates, from this end of the telescope will get the west with huge subsidies, like the west is saying okay we are getting huge subsidies, messing up the system, ruining the market's, reducing prices, give other solutions how to solve the agriculture. we are not going to undo this mess. >> for the west the subsidies of the west there is some of that that distorts prices and reduces the developing opportunities. mostly it is a waste of money and some small percentage of that went to the aid to help bootstrap the investments of the

farmers that would pay off in terms of nutrition and livelihood and getting rid of starvation. one group that we've reached out to is the private sector and i think almost all of the companies involved in the food in any way the world economic forum we have some type of a partnership with. with adm we are working with cocoa farmers because what they were making couldn't be put on the international market. the quality, the storage wasn't right. we are working on coffee which africa can make very good coffee but it's not sort in the right way. nigeria imports rice evin there should be growing its own rice. with coca-cola we have a fruit eckert where it is in kenya and tanzania to take passion fruit coming go and get them to do it in the right way where they can access the market so getting them further up the value chain and making sure the price

tickets down to them is a much higher percentage there has to be some funding but the return on this funding is quite phenomenal. >> any questions on pricing, the gentleman at the back. >> select to the extent that in the short term the likelihood of withdrawal of subsidies isn't something on which we can expect very quick answers and considering the fact that the present is going to remain for a while, what other tips can be considered to get countries out of the mind set which set in in terms of self-reliance which can allow for the global forces to

this present spike in prices which we see? >> bill gates, you want to answer that? >> one of the big food buyers in the world is the food program and a great job. the donors often force them to take the food from the rich countries instead of donating money and allowing the crops in the nearby african countries to be purchased and increase the capacity and having the lower transport costs. there's been some progress in reforming this so the countries give more money and there's been some eckert -- we've given a lot of money to the world food programs so they are working with local farmers so they can qualify for those purchased programs. so africa needs to open up trade within africa. there's still quite a few barriers but it is policies or infrastructure that prevent them from working well. >> i think in addition to all of

that we have to look beyond the aid. i don't think that aid can solve these problems, and then we have to really encourage investment. so if the private sector come if we can't get the subsidies down and it's going to take time as the prime minister of the vietnam pleaded to complete the bill of around and get the tariffs down and subsidies of at least private-sector could come to those countries when they create the right environment to invest and when you invest you can have many countries of enough space and room you cannot both commercial like a culture and small holder agriculture side-by-side in fact work in such a way that they benefit the small farmers can benefit from a private sector that sets up and serves as an [inaudible] that can provide sort of a market and distribution channel for the small farmers. it can work.

so all i would say is we need that investment. so enough talk already. those who want to hold common invest. [applause] >> with all the increasing production, efficiency and all of its innovation i don't see by 2015 having the food, d.c. this more conflict if there's not enough? if there's no major league in food production would that create conflict? >> there are technologies today we and others in the industry are working on that for instance can increase the yield 40% over the next eight to ten years and that is what we know today and there's research programs that continue in many of these areas and not only on just the general appealed but the conditions which they operate being able to

grow in drought conditions and use less nitrogen and create some the efficiency so what we know today can get half the way they're and i think the investments the industry is making will continue to produce results. the question then is the first one that came how do you get it to the market because as we go into countries in africa and are working on a local basis, you can create real progress but how do you leverage that across a larger area faster? we have been working in west africa with africa harvest, west african see the association. we worked to create for local seed companies, locally owned and a strained right now close to 2,000 farmers but how do you take that that's one small area and leverage it? that's kind of the issue we are coming up against is how to get the curve quickly. >> patricia, bill gates also talk about this going up the

value chain. apart from normal tariffs the other barriers like standards, what kind of standards to use in producing your food? now we see a lot of credit standards, you have a wal-mart standard and somebody -- it kind of prevents economies of scale if you have a lot of private parties setting their own standards. is it time for more of a global body that sets standards and across that you can export? >> will perhaps a quick description. adm is neither a retail food manufacturer nor producers. we kind of work in that space between taking the global harvest to the food producers, and frankly they not only standards by particular retailers which you comment on the evin standards by countries. we talked earlier about g m zero to have to segregate or the need

to segregate crops in different aspects to get them to market because the differences across the country's four regions is probably the first process to salt -- >> unification on standards is needed then. >> than through the consumer side that is where you want choice, you want differences, you want people to have the opportunity to choose different types of food -- the innovation standards have come from the private sector. so can you have a global basic standard and than innovate privately about that? >> well, i wouldn't -- i would say there's a lot more problems we've been talking about solving before the standards of that. >> for an exporter it is a big issue because they say you didn't need this particular standard we can't import your food. now the gentleman there. >> jeff from canada. the opening question seemed to be how we feed the population. the entire focus has been on

production and seems to me what we've missed in the conversation is the issue of obesity and the fact there are more people obies in the world and malnutrition so if you combine the fact that we produce enough food globally right now to feed the world if we deal with waste problems and with the addition of obesity we may solve the problem very quickly. >> eat the right kind of food. food is nutrition. that is the point. the gentleman -- yes, right there. >> thank you very much. steve snyder, scientists from stanford university. how could i not ask a climate question which has to do with the price. one of the things that we expect as climate changes since we can't predict the details, only the general trend is a could be further increasing volatility not just from year to year but also in the distribution of where it's produced from north to south the south being more

disadvantaged. one way you can assure against the volatilities through food reserves. we learned that a long time ago. i wrote a book in 1976 called the genesis strategy that it was violently opposed by the midwest because they thought that the grain reserves were going to drive down prices yet it also provides a measure of security. so the question i have then is how do you want to deal with the trade-off between production incentives and having a safe set of storage and who should have the storage and what should the rules before its release? >> good question. everybody seems to be thinking about it. while they think about what you like to take that one? >> i was trying to think. you could think of various ways of dealing with this. but we actually have an expert on this issue in this audience

and i think we should call on him to answer. he's sitting right there. he's done a lot of work thinking about the issue of grain reserves. instead of quoting him, let him speak for himself. [laughter] >> thank you. remember the situation in 2008 production problems led to nervousness and markets, prices increased, speculation said in, borders were closed, markets failed, countries tried to build their own stocks country by country. it's a very inefficient. so what we have been arguing for is a system of shared global reserves combined with a virtual

reserve so [inaudible] -- but a pot of money which can be mobilized where appropriate regulated commodity exchanges to engage in preventing price spikes, not the generally stabilization schemes beat we had those in the past. price spike prevention schemes which prevent the spikes -- >> what about if there is a drought. you could draw on those reserves as well? >> draw it has large and international or regional price go through the roof of course. >> let's get to the final stage. we've only got a few minutes left. can we ask each one of the panelists to talk about goals that should be set? this morning we talked about setting some big goals like i think one that was suggested was there should be no child with

malnutrition by 2025, some particular year. is that feasible or any other big bull each of you could set an agenda. >> actually i wasn't the one -- it was the head of the world food program who said -- i picked up on it and said maybe if we set ourselves a big goal then we can work towards that and i agree with that. >> give one goal that we should have. >> that's a good one. [laughter] by 2020 we shouldn't have any child who is hungry or malnourished and then we can go from obese children and obese people, to those who are skinny or maybe they are skinny healthy but those who don't have enough to eat. that means we have to solve these problems of distribution of food, not just production. >> if you have a goal and a lot of things fall into place -- >> that is a good one, no

children should be hungry. >> i think you have to break it down so i would suggest a goal that stock in sub-saharan africa why not double the production through productivity and in a reasonable amount of time, in ten years. >> bill gates? a goal that he would like to see. >> one way to look at this is from the point of view of the small holder farmer. the majority of the naturally impoverished or small holder farmers so if you have a goal of doubling their income so they have enough to feed themselves and enough to sell -- to make some money and therefore break the cycle where they can't afford the fertilizer so they don't buy the fertilizers and they don't get the yield so they don't have the money out in the future. there's a bootstrap that has to take place and i have a record on this, this is effective aid helping the small holders get