i don't think that it could work to delay. >> i think it would work to improve and create more efficient in the relation between the regulator and the industry. [inaudible] >> mr. chairman, thank you for image. another support hearing is going to outlive the recommendations to prevent another deepwater rising disaster from happening again which is why think were here. it's not to debate whether one supports or opposes offshore drilling. it's to make sure we don't want this happen again and they'll understand the roles we have to play to get the.

in the lives lost 15 people. 200,000 of crude oil that ruptured in northern alaska. these are real incidents. what is most significant about the report is that it reveals the culture of undermining safety standards is not just an issue for bp but an epidemic feel you're facing the entire offshore drilling industry putting directly from the report the blowout was not the product decisions made by the rogue industry or government officials

rather the root causes are systemic reform and with industry practices, government policies, the bipartisan commission's report only confirms that congress must take action, do our part to prevent the disasters like this from happening again. during the 111th congress this committee could work to develop safeguards would modernize safety and environmental protections for federal offshore programs. many expressed an interest to see the report before we move forward. we now have that report and as i hear from witnesses of the bipartisan commission today, we have to ask ourselves what are we going to do, what is our role as congress to make sure this never happens again? are we going to sit back and allow this to continue? we cannot turn a blind eye on this. the report outlines congress needs to act to protect the safety of people, the welfare of the communities and habitat of federal to the kawai of life. seven months ago we saw the images of the explosion that killed workers.

the plumes of oil that devastated marine life, and vulnerable wetlands and the two entered 5 million gallons of oil spilled in the gulf because the deepwater horizon spell. let's never forget the people impacted in the families who lost their loved ones. it's in everyone's interest including industry cannot let this happen again. to understand the responsibility we have to do our part to prevent that. is a yes or no question. we also learned during this bill how underprepared the federal government was to estimate the actual flow rate of oil spewing from the well. in fact the federal response was initially entirely dependent on misleading the flow rate estimates provided by idp which had every reason to lowball them because we knew the life devotee was tied to the calculations on a per barrel basis. the legislation democrats introduced today creates a permanent scientific group that includes scientists from the

national laboratories and the energy that will maintain expertise needed to estimate flow rates. is this consistent with your recommendation? >> it is consistent. yes, it is. we determined that one consequence of the structure of the law is the responsible party takes the lead in overseeing response we want to keep the liability fixed but one part of it which the government should have an independent capability to carry out is the determination of the flow rate and director has said that wouldn't be an issue next time. >> one last question and then we can get this answered leader is to report rebuilds the positives bill was over mismanagement and adequate government regulation and a lack of political will to ensure proper oversight of the offshore oil industry as the push drilling into deeper waters. describing your report this problem is pervasive of offshore drilling industries. so my question is what will be

the consequence of the reform feel to be prioritized including the passage of proper legislation to minimize the chances of a disaster like this from happening again? mr. chairman i know we are out of time and i want to be respectful to the other members so we asked the witnesses to mabey send goes back to us. so i think there is a very thoughtful the answer that we need as a part of that. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i thank the gentleman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. gentlemen, thank you for being here today. it's a privilege. in addition to serving on this distinguished committee also serve on the small business committee and my first question to do all in this regard is gentlemen, what would you say to the owners of the small businesses in this region struggling to survive until operations are restored in the gulf? these people have lost most of the revenue streams if not all the revenue streams. it made extraordinary personal and professional sacrifices to

retain employees and retain their businesses but they cannot hold oni y ought to address that, please. >> of course what you just described describes a number of the industries that are dependent on the gulf. there are thousands of fishermen who lost their ability to acquire their incoming and there was a degradation of the brand of the gulf seafood 20 to 30% drop almost overnight and the consumption the seafood which has not yet been overcome. we need some specific recommendations on that subject. the tourism industry which depends upon people's feeling they are going to go to a place that is clean and healthy and enjoyable. it also suffered a tremendous damage. so the consequences of an even like this have rippling effects. mr. reilly has described the

fact that we believe their needs to be a safe industry, there can be a safe industry but that there needs to be an offshore oil industry to meet the energy requirements in the united states. so, and we sympathize for all the small businesses with the be fishermen, restaurant owners or suppliers to the oil and gas industry and we hope we can get back in business as rapidly as possible with the safety measures that will protect all those interests. >> thank you. congressman, i don't know if you have had this experience, but i ordered some oysters in new york some time in september and asked whether they were from the gulf and was reassured confidently by the waitress know we wouldn't serve any seafood from the gulf. that problem persisted through the fall. i understand it's not entirely disappeared now. people continue the, the

fishermen, continue to suffer. i remember talking to the governor around memorial day of mississippi who told me that there wasn't any oil within 60 miles of the beaches of mississippi but there was 30% occupancy in what usually is the most important occasion tourism year, weekend year of mississippi. those stories and of europeans cancelling trips to key west where the we'll never approached are very poignant stories. vietnamese fishermen impressed me more than those of any other in my experience when i was in the gulf, and we had hearings. the first was in new orleans. we became familiar with the problems you described and they are as serious as you say. >> thank you. i have a follow-up question. in additional fees and proposed taxes on the industry, what would the total government take away the including royalties, severance taxes, property taxes, income taxes, least bonuses and

proposed additional fees and taxes mentioned in the report? >> i don't think that we have costed those numbers in total. the only thing i would say is it is important to keep in perspective the amount of revenue the government takes in from the oil offshore development anywhere from $68 billion in one year up to buy feed $18 billion in 2008. the second largest revenue generator after the irs, and we can afford to spend some very small proportion which would be in dollar numbers reasonably significant ensuring that it's better done than it has been done by the government. senator? >> according to the chart that appears on 73 of the report in the year 1984, the budget of the mms was rendered $50 in 2009 and was somewhere south of 200. at the same time, the industry

has the same chart displays as moved from being a relatively well-known shallow water industry to increasingly 80 potter high risk industry. you would have thought that the lines of cost of effective regulation would have coincided with the increase risk. i can't tell you a exactly what the member is, but it would be hard to justify what appears to be about a 60 to $70 million a year reduction in the kit devotee of the regulatory agency at the time the industry is going into more risky areas. >> thank you, senator. >> dr. chris jansing. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and i want to thank our panelists for being here. on, too, want to commend you for

the broad array of contributors to this very comprehensive report. among the many areas of concern come on, too come have to say i cannot understand the standards were lower than other countries and specifically lower than the u.k. if i remember correctly where bp should be the highest in the world. and i also want to support before i get to my questions, senator gramm's response on a moratorium, because according to my report, the department of interior since june of last year of sure shella water 500 feet or less, and only four or five shallow water permits under deep water drilling the moratorium was lifted on october 12th and gas operators have to comply with the new regulations to show that the it strategy to actually contain a blowout. according to the interior department, thus far no one has been able to demonstrate that all the line of they are working

on at and that is the holdup, not the department of the fact the companies are not able to respond adequately at this time. on the good news according to the department some companies are getting closer to being able to demonstrate that ability and i do share the majority hoped that this could happen as quickly as possible. my first question i wanted to follow-up and saying that a systemic failure occurred did you mean systemic in this case of the three companies and their management of the deep water horizon drilling or did you need to apply to the entire industry and say that the entire industry has been complacent? i just want to understand what you meant by systemic. >> we didn't mean parents.

that is that all companies were equally subjective as the culture of complacency. there are some companies that have a very strong record. what we meant to say was that there were evidences that the industry had not responded to the recognition that there were some out lawyer companies that needed to be sanctioned. you're medical physician if there was a physician in the u.s. virgin islands who was known by the others performing at a rate that people's lives at risk i would assume would be your professional responsibility to bring that into the attention. we do not feel the industry carried out its obligation for self policing and the support the recommendation for the input organization. second, the example of response. response is an industrywide

obligation. we don't expect every company to have all of the equipment is necessary to respond, but we expect the industry writ large to have the capacity to respond, and it was clear that not only was there not capacity but it had been relatively little investment in tuck technology or research development in the understanding of the environment that would have put them in a position to have produced response. >> with a comment on your point about the u.k. experience. we have discovered in the course of our research the companies and industries get serious about reforming practices and improving them when they have their catastrophe. the u.k. this race catastrophe that cost 187 lives in 1989, our chief counsel was intimately involved in investigating the accident. there was after that that the regulator was separated revenues

for regulation just as we are proposing here and to develop a different motive regulation is known as the safety case where were the particular is likely to be entailed in a particular situation that is with the acknowledgement of the formation that and all the rest be explained by the company in which the company proposes to address those risks made clear to the regulators that is the system now. norway has a similar system and they came to that after their catastrophe. australia today dealing with a blowout that occurred last year. it is that the commission of inquiry and the are reforming their own practices. islamic are you having that happen now? >> we know that the industry is very seriously examining the possibility and practical challenges to the safety institute of the source we recommend a and we very much look forward to having the result of those inquiries and we hope they will do something

along the lines that we have recommended. we think that it's very possible that they will. we certainly know that several ceos of major companies take it seriously mr. kaufman of cover-up. >> thank you, mr. chairman. first of all thank you so much for your work and what you have accomplished. i can't you mentioned some things that need to be done from your perspective some kind of international agreements others uniform standards. i think you talked about responsibility to an accident if it occurs having a definition of that, but perhaps some insurance requirements reviewing that lawyer devotee issues. i think what i'm hearing from you is in terms of the

prevention one is responding and the other is prevention. so in terms of prevention i guess my question to you is it adequate regulations exist, but was it merely the enforcement of the regulation that was the problem? because certainly we know that mms had very significant problems and i think there was a report in 2008 that talks about how dysfunctional mms was command and we heard in this situation here how the inspection simply didn't occur in the manner that they were prescribed and we are supposed to occur, and so sometimes we have problems i see where we actually have laws on the books, regulations on the book but they are not being enforced. and so, i think that when we

look at what is now the bureau of ocean and energy management regulation and enforcement mr. reilly it is reported that you come in yourself, said that personnel working for this agency are, quote on quote, often badly trained to be the secretary salazar said that he has already considered and executed some of the suggestions that your report is highlighted, hopefully effective training and cultural shift at his organization were implemented as well. do you lead the reforms among the others that secretary salazar is said to have made would have been sufficient to correct the missteps the were made by mms prior to and during the deepwater horizon spill let's just go into the prevention. if in fact we have a functional

regulatory organization that was enforcing the tax system rules would that have been adequate to prevent the incident occurred? >> let me say that i think the recommendations that -- and the new policy prescriptive regulations that the secretary have in pos are very desirable and are likely to be effective. - pressure tests are now prescribed. they were not before. a new range of requirements that appear to make sense, but the reality is that the existing personnel complement entails an inspector for every 55 rigs in california is one for every six. the answers given to a series of interlocking for questions posed by the interior department and the coast guard in their investigations make clear that

basic petrochemical technologies, guest technologies like cement and centralizing - pressure tests are not really understood by the inspectors who have said frankly that they take industry lead on those technologies, the the his been evolving over time and that we simply have to provide better formation, editor training and better compensation for the people conducting that work. so even if today the regulations are sufficient to guard against the repetition of this set of problems, on worries that in the fast evolving industry in three to five years the media outdated and in order to keep them up-to-date i think we are going to have to bring them the game among the professionals in the agency. >> senator gramm? >> i would agree with that, and i believe that our recommendations such as the independence of the safety

function within the department of interior are as important as the decisions that, chris made a number of years ago to make the fbi calls on independent agency within the department of justice. just like the fbi, the safety function within the department of interior is susceptible to the political interference and in fact in the case of mms it was rented interference and we think it's a combination of good regulations, confident capacity, adequate capacity and the insulation from inappropriate external influences that are all part of what's necessary to get us up to world-class standards of safety in this industry. >> mr. treen, i yield back. >> mr. sarbanes of maryland.

>> thank you, mr. chairman and all of you for being here. i know it's been a long day. i first wanted to commend you on the report i haven't had a chance to read it from beginning to end but i did look at a summary of the findings made are helpful and will be for a lot of us going forward. my understanding of gotten some criticism about whether you had everything in front of you, whether you had a blowout preventer and so forth but as i look at the recommendations, they seem to me to be confined to a kind that you could make with a lot of confidence without having the fix to a piece of information at your disposal. it doesn't strike me that anything about your recommendations will be changed in any kind of sycophant way based on other information that comes forward because you have really deride from what you saw. there was also a comment about your recommending lawyering

another bureaucracy on top of a failed bureaucracy, but as i again read the recommendations i think what you're doing is suggesting a reasonable set of regulatory oversight which in many ways will substitute has been a field bureaucracy. >> on the issue of bureaucracy, i would ask you to respond to a proposal to be the this is something i suggested in earlier iterations of legislation addressing the oil spill. it was a provision that we tried to include in the clear act and this would be a requirement that the ceo of the corporations of the company's would certify, personally certified with a potential for liability to the adequacy and safety of the response plan. for the simple, you talked but many have diluted hokies

response plans that were developed really across the industry it was highlighted in bp's particular oil spill response plan but were an adequate, so i'd like you to speak what we ought to give meaningful consideration as i would like to see to a requirement when the part of the corporate ceo to certify the these plans are in fact good plans and they do good diligence and can do more in terms of changing the culture of those companies with that one piece of leverage than a whole new bureaucracy so if you could speak to that i would appreciate it. >> my own sense is the way that such certifications would occur practically is the head of

offshore or north america would sign a certification the chief financial settlor officer might sign the certification and chief save the environment vice president would sign the certification and fulfill those signatures were present in the ceo will sign, and i don't know that would enhance the liability assignment that you would like to see. it might be from a personal point of view more closely involved, more intimately include a ceo and a decision that is made, but as mr. heyward said, he didn't know anything about problems that characterize the situation and didn't know that it had been a troublesome well. it hadn't been particularly involved in making decisions for it or apparently didn't even know that it was coming in late. it's a very large company, and so i am not confident myself based on my own experience with boards of directors that would contribute that much to safety frankly. >> do you think he would have

bothered to no more if he had been required to certify as based inadequacy of the plant's? >> he would have probably had to find scores of certifications without any individual personal knowledge of the degree to which the characteristics of the situations were familiar to him, and so i have reservations about that particular recommendation. i had a conversation with mr. waxman. i know that it was strongly supported in the part of the committee, but from my point of view and it's not that, and another high-risk industries either to try to fix the responsibility of the very top. it's there any way if the company encounters it tend to 20 to $30 billion expense obviously. and now i think everybody's attention is very focused on liability. and to my knowledge, every company has stood down to examine their own form of political their own risk and to

get their practices improved. but that's my personal judgment. we did not as a -- i actually consulted our senior technology adviser on that particular issue and we gave it some consideration within the commission and didn't go forward with it. >> can i get the senators answer to that question briefly? >> if the center can do it and 15 seconds which is a test. your question is will this be worthy of exploring a think the answer to that question is yes. my colleague has done some of the exploring and it does come to the conclusion that he has but i think it is an issue that frankly you're father has given us the opportunity to move this from being a theory to reality, and that is has it changed the corporate executives that under his legislation they now are required for public companies to

sign personally as to the accuracy of their financial statements to be interesting to do some oversight and that might be in a better position to evaluate potential applicability to offshore oil drilling. >> you didn't quite do it, senator, but my stride. [laughter] >> well, i got a little bit off. >> that's all right, you're talking to the son of a senator, i know how that happens. mr. duncan of south carolina. >> thank you, mr. chairman. gentlemen, thank you for being here. i have studied this all afternoon and went to comment on it -- >> you're the only one who can read it. >> you have reference to it several times today and have come to some conclusions i think are flawed and here's why. i spent some time on the mms ocs committee will look at the natural gas and come up with recommendations for the next

plan those leases would be granted, and it struck me during the time that the only areas we could even talk about within that committee was deepwater gom and alaska. nearshore the 1,000 ft or shallower were off-limits to even talk about for the next five-year period so when you see an increase of activity in deepwater exploration and production, i think it is strictly attributable to the fact that policies of the united states government have pushed the oil exploration and production away from the shore, we from the marshes and the rivers and other things to be potter, so some of the conclusions you've come to based on that chart our fault so long to make those comments and mr. chairman i hope that on the subcommittee or this committee will continue to look at the policies that are in place that pushed it too deep water and

continue to look in your short, onshore and other resources coming forward. a couple of questions for you based on your report on a different line of thinking. you have the efforts in response to the disaster and i want to commend the guys that went out on the rescue effort with coast guard and others, and the line of questioning has no bearing on their efforts, but the lack of attention to this critical part of the disaster has left many of us confused and in the report tuesday others are going to study this issue more completely. can you tell me first, and there are going to be three questions, can you tell me first in your opinion if you believe that the efforts were probably coordinated, that's number one, the second thing believe that firefighting contributed to the thinking of the rig and was there a possibility of saving and what did have permitted the blowout that we saw?

was there a possibility to let the oil continue to burn and were gone shutting off the flow of oil that was attributing and that was the source of fuel for the fire were the structural integrity of the rig in jeopardy any way. so if you could answer those in either one. >> i said that one of the lessons learned is that we were very ill prepared to grace pond particularly in the critical first hours and days, and i would suggest that be included in the ability to restrain fire under these circumstances. if i could, i would like to go back to your first comments. if you have to look at the issue of depletion. we have been heavily mining for oil and gas since 1938. to continue to do so today. i believe that these charts are

as much a function of the reality that most of where the oil is today, the so-called elephants of offshore oil are not in the thousands, they're likely to be five or 10,000 feet in that is where the industry is moving. but that might be a question that your subcommittee could examine. what are the factors -- >> we will pursue that at a later time. let's go to the firefighting efforts and would be attributed to the good that's a lot of questions in my district and south carolina and the land that i have heard so do you think the firefighting efforts were coordinated and do you think they could set their and berne to show off the flow of water and the integrity of the rig? was it in jeopardy? you have any input on that? >> the only thing i would say without wanting to characterize a lot of activities that

occurred in the chaos of the fire and the response and there were moments at various times when the control could still possibly have been established. even the gas is rising federal pike could have been diverted over the side and perhaps not come into contact with the source and not caught fire, but that once the fire began when we look at the transcripts of the reports of what was like and how it seemed like a jet airplane or fast-moving train had just come out of control pike i'm not sure there was a great deal that could have been done that would have averted a disaster it does occur that the degree to which the response to the emergency immediately was characterized by a lot of chaos one of the rescue

boats leaving a number of people still on rig who jumped into the water and did survive people that made that choice and then discovered those who were in the evacuation but they couldn't get away as it looked like it was going to topple and they were tendered by a rope and no one was allowed to have a knife on the rigged so they had to look for means of severing the rope. it didn't appear in the documentation supports this that there had been the kind of drills simulations from practices that would have been appropriate and i think will be insisted upon in the industry in the future and that is one more change that needs to occur that we've learned a lesson from. >> do you think that would continue running? thank you, mr. chairman. >> the time has expired. mr. landrieu. stat thank you, mr. chairman. just for the record, i did raise

the commission's credentials on my campaign to get here. maybe they were not raising it in june but i sure was in louisianan. considering the industry's performance in the gulf of mexico where over 42,000 wells have been drilled in addition to 2500 deepwater without any significant incidents in my opinion reflected the successful risk-management worthies safety factors, and these are yes or no questions, were these facts the success in history of all of the wells that had been drilled out in the gulf of mexico, were they taken into account when you did this report? >> yes, sir. >> okay. >> was there any economic analysis done during the course of this report in terms of the impact of not only the gulf economy but the national economy

as well taking into account? >> we know tens of billions or damage to the environment primarily of the gulf as a result of the bill. so the answer is yes. >> the president's commission to determine a cause of the disaster to improve the country's ability to respond and recommend reforms that the offshore energy production safer. prior to the accident there existed multiple layers of environmental reviews including multiple eis that the dui uses in the environmental impact assessments. these included a eis during the peak of the month of the five-year review, and again prior to the lease sales. where do they receive the conclusion that the review warrants any additional changes as i find that in no conclusion

it contributed to the impact of the queen of? >> will let and the increasing emphasis on the coast guard, other agencies that represent the best science and the government and our proposal to reduce best science from outside the government all go to our interest in enhanced safety including understanding what are the risks at the individual sites being suggested and what are the potential lenders effect of the safety of those who will be operating in that area and the environmental quality of the gulf? the answer to your question is yes, we took those into account as part of our overall assessment. we are aware of the fact that

the industry in particular certain companies within the industry have had a very strong safety record. we are not saying that everybody was the same but we are saying that we think that the overall record in the gulf is stunningly below what it is in the standard of the world. if our aviation industry had a record that would buy three to five to one ratio we were killing people on airplanes than for instance great britain was we would be upset about why this was happening. that happens to be about the case in this industry between norway and great britain and the u.s.. we believe it is in the spirit of america to want to be the best. >> i'm glad you brought that up,

senator. the recommendations -- i'm also confused you would make the suggestion under reporting incidents in the u.s. because the numbers are low. are you aware that the industry regard to the european standards reporting incidents fairly less reliable than the u.s.? >> i am not aware of the assessment of that by the u.s. industry. i am familiar with the fact that our fatality to accent ratio is significantly different than it is in the north sea which raises questions as to whether we are capturing the accidents that in fact are occurring. i am not aware of any evidence that would indicate that there should be such a significant differential between fatalities and accidents in the gulf and in the north sea. >> i will be supplementing some questions to you all -- >> we are aware that there are different ways of categorizing

incidents, accidents, fatalities, days lost and so on, record rebels in the north sea versus the gulf, different jurisdictions between the u.k. and norway. some of the data need to be closely scrutinized to determine that you're dealing with oranges and oranges and not apples and oranges. >> on both sides you would agree. >> yes i would. >> the less disputable number, it is harder to hide the bodies, so i think we are confident those numbers are as we found and they are disturbing. >> mr. chairman, thank you for holding today's hearing and chairman gramm, thank you for joining us today. i know you've put in a lot of work on your report and we appreciate you being here today. i have an opening statement that i would like to give to the chairman for the record and will dispense with that for now. it has been nine months since the macondo well accident and we

all grieve for the families that lost loved ones and for those that were injured and for the impact of several families along the gulf coast hit by one you to know from a personal standpoint that i lost a brother and the business and so i have as much interest in conducting this industry as safely as possible as anybody in this room. but i want to make sure that we facilitate a robust oil and gas industry because of the central to our economic security and our military security. and as a person that was actively involved in the offshore energy business for over 30 years i am aware of the -- keenly concerned about the recommendations and the commission report. i think it's interesting you use the three mile island analogy because as you pointed out, after three mile island we haven't started and completed the construction of a nuclear power plant in 30 years.

it appears we are headed down the same road today with offshore drilling. we had a permit moratorium, defacto and deep water and we have an incredible slowdown in the shallow water drilling and we are already seeking that show up in higher gasoline prices to and reduced economic activity along the gulf coast. here's the issue. congress legislation the department of interior is issuing new regulations, lease sales have been canceled, other areas of potential offshore activities have been put off-limits again and it's based on a report that doesn't provide a full post mortem from what's what happened. here's the key phrase that is used because of the concern. you keep referring to systemic industrywide failure. on chapter four of the reporting

to increase fixed, you have the following findings. adel well blew out because a number of separate risk factors oversights and all right mistakes, to overwhelm the safeguards meant to provide such from happening. but, most of the mistakes and oversights and macondo can be traced back to a single overarching failure, failure of management, better management to be paid, halliburton and transocean would almost certainly prevented the blowout by approving the ability of individuals to identify the risk they face and to evaluate, communicate and address them. so how do you -- how can you reconcile between what happened in the offshore energy business today to call in a systemic failure and a systemic industrywide failure to report which just gets down to three companies and with the entire nation economy on peril by doing this. let me give an example.

what if we find out after we get the bp will help prevent her fully evaluated it takes a 2 billion boulder that could cure 99.9% of the time and this accident essentially never happened. that is the ratio of accidents that we got in deepwater. we have gone overboard. so why did we use those words systemic industrywide family because that is what caused the paranoia. >> in 1963, congressman, it was a single weld as i understand that sank the submarine and the system was developed and we've not lost the submarine since we lost one every third year on average in peace time before that. the reason that we conclude its systemic and we didn't come in or i didn't believe it was a

systemic problem it was a single up company that had been was because of the very large presence of those three companies throughout the oil and gas industry and the deep water and shallow water throughout the world. bp is the largest exporter of offshore oil and gas development. transocean is the largest operator and halliburton is the largest supplier of resources such as cement. it is no longer possible for most companies to test the cement for example the are provided by halliburton. they no wonder of the research capacity. chevron does and maybe one or two but most decided in the 80's and 90's to contract that out. so the cement that is provided is the cement that gets used and was provided by the test halliburton conducted and the commission conducted was faulty. it is simply inconceivable to us

that this was a problem so exclusive, so especially circumstance with respect to one rig especially since we know in australia it failed just a year and a half or so ago. also, this is something that caused us to believe, and again, most of the people were transocean employees. the people responsible for responding to the emergency as i just described that is the largest operator and owner in the world. it operates for everybody. everybody hauliers transocean and they also are implicated in a significantly failing to detect gas rising in the pike. we concluded from that that all companies are at risk if they are using these contractors or bp itself is at risk and other places. we did here and we ask the norwegian regulators are you taking actions against bp?

the answer is somewhat surprising now we are not because we do not see issues in the north sea with respect to the dp operations and therefore be taken no action to discourage their continuing cooperation. that poses the question to less well, what is it about the north sea and the gulf that has our companies operating safely and protectively in the north sea subject to a different set of regulators and not in the gulf? that caused us to look closely at the degree of oversight, the quality of regulation and the capacity of the regulators will also follow. estimate the time of the gentleman has expired. >> mr. rivera from florida. >> thank you, mr. chairman, gentlemen, for being here today. commissioner gramm, senator gramm has a floridian and are

you still living in the leaks, miami lakes? west of palmetto? i'm right there with you down the road, so as my distinguished constituent -- [laughter] as my distinguished constituent, i know we share a great concern for the economy and the environment of the state of florida. one of the recommendations that you make in your report addresses the need for greater international scrutiny, international standards. as a representative from four south florida i'm concerned about the development of the coast of florida on the oil development off the coast of florida and off the coast of cuba in particular. as you know there are a number of companies including what saw interest in drilling in the waters off cuba. i want to ask you do you believe that this cubin which rolling in the coast of florida and cuba will be done safely and what

could the u.s. do to ensure that any lack of cubin oversight doesn't threaten florida and the southeastern united states? >> i am concerned about the safety of the relative lack of experience of the cubans and terms of being able to oversee this activity. the companies that are being brought in to do this work isn't comforting. i believe something analogous to what mr. reilly has said that we need to have gulf of mexico 18 set safety standards that would apply to any country touching the gulf is the best assurance the united states have inappropriate, unsafe practices in our backyard, and i believe

there is a sufficient interest between the united states and mexico to move forward in the direction commandos' mr. reilly has indicated, the mexicans have suggested they might need interlocutory to cuba to get involved. to me it also underscores the importance of the united states having the highest standards. if you go to in the negotiations and are urging the other parties to take their game up a notch and you have not already done that your persuasiveness is limited. for our own protection and of devotee to raise those standards in the gulf that we need to adopt policies such as those we suggested. >> to that end do you believe that responsible domestic development in the eastern gulf of mexico would result in additional oil spill response

capabilities being staged in florida that could be used to respond to a potential spill off florida from the cuban dictatorship, we'll drilling efforts? >> the u.s. waters. >> i don't know what the ultimate treaty might say, but i would be surprised if it did not make it the sovereign responsibility of each of the country's to provide that kind of capability for those wells within their own area and i certainly don't think the united states ought to be depending upon mexico providing them containment and response capabilities. we ought to do that. the mexicans ought to do that and the cubans proceed with their plans they ought to do it. so the answer would be no. >> thank you

>> the time of the gentleman has expired. another gentleman from florida, mr. sutherland. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman and four-door report, for appearing before us today. i am from panama city florida, i -- my district is the second district of florida. i took my baby steps on the beaches of panama city, and i love our environment and in a day when my family and my children on the island is a little piece of heaven for me. my community, friends of mine were deeply affected by this disaster. one of the things i want to ask you and i just want to ask some brief questions knowing how much responsibility in light of this disaster, and responsibility do you believe that the government

bears after having cited 790 violations how much responsibility do they bear? also by refusing to waive the jones act and bringing in oil ships that have the ability to clean up that oil by leaders around the world that produce those ships how much responsibility is baird by this government? >> we did inquire into the application of the act and the allegations made particularly by the europeans and other commissioners the european union that we were keeping out belgian and dutch responsibility and the response we received from the coast guard is offers or looked at largely not taken into account i guess most we not taken into account because they were not considered necessary at that time were useful for the

particular task. in mississippi there were from france a series of skimmers, six or eight that were brought in and used so it is possible in other words to get out help from other countries. the coastguard was sufficiently crowded with its own response that vetting applications from other companies and other technologies was probably something that in real time they didn't have an awful lot of time to give. >> this goes back to a theme of today and that this you don't do basic research while five year is out of control and if you haven't done it before the fire it's not likely to be very effective. i think things like -- >> i understand that when you have a neighbor that is willing

to bring a boat load of hoses you accept those hoses and say you know what, my first party, my first priority is to put out the fire. i get angry when i think of the pain we have experienced a long that gulf coast and i think of my dear friends who are no longer in business. it interests me and yet today we want to talk about the response of devotee of bp and how they should solve regulate their industry. when 790 violations were noted that is incompetent, yet we have the idea we are going to have ceo's stand up and sign a letter of certification certify leinwand devotee. i want secretaries of interior and regulatory department heads to sign the same documents. the american people are tired of sending their money to washington, d.c. and washington being the problem. all i am incurred by the response of this government in

light of this disaster. i am anchored by the government that failed in their response to katrina and until we start looking inward and to get personal responsibility to the lives we are destroying instead of incessant blame it's got to be somebody else's fault. the responsibilities here. the buck stops here, and i'm bothered that this commission, decisions, there should be ten down here and the bottom i wrote the government's decisions to aid and abet was less likely alternative available? yes. less time than alternative? yes, the seedtime. a decision maker, the federal government on shore, and i am bothered we are going to add to the bureaucracy when the bureaucracy was the problem in many ways. >> you've raised an important question that we address with

respect to safety personal safety, occupational safety and health rigs themselves. presently, under when a rig is under seal or in motion it is the responsibility of the coast guard to ensure safety. we recommend that the boemre has a full responsibility on the rig for safety personnel and that it understand and have the capability to enforce that so there's not a division of responsibility or confusion about whether this is a delegated responsibility to the coast guard and the role of ms and that it be amalgamated in one agency. on the jones act the key issue in my view is to have procedures go in place ahead of time so that the extensive permitting reviews and approvals by the state department are not necessary once the catastrophe may have occurred.

>> that is what i was going to say that you need to anticipate and i would suggest this committee could make a significant contribution in doing some serious thinking about what are the questions, what are the resources, what are the potential impediments when we have the next disaster it won't be exactly like this one but we will have more disasters. how can we by anticipating take actions that will avoid the hoses not being delivered. >> the time of the gentleman is expired. >> thank you. mr. thompson. >> someone had offered in our sg of airline and now what she earlier, and as i have looked up and read through and tried to synthesize the commission's recommendation if i apply the recommendations to the airline industry is essentially with one

plane crashed we would shut down all airplanes and frankly all airports. i apologize for being late. i was in the work force hearing and i had an opportunity to question governor mcdonald of virginia, and specifically my question is what the impact of the administration's response of shutting down offshore as a result of this and here are some of the statistics i will be quick and then my questions. he indicated that this industry created more than 1900 new jobs in virginia, increased the state's gross domestic product by to under $50 million annually in janaria park simply 19.4 in federal, state and local revenues. senator graham, secretary riley, page two of your testimony states most of the mistakes and oversights of macondo can be traced back to a single overarching failure. a failure of management by bp, halliburton and transocean, and

under the key facts, you also stated that the investigation team identified several human errors, engineering mystics and management failures. a person concluded it wasn't a lack of adequate science and engineering but the problem application of science and engineering by those on the radar the resulting in the deepwater horizon macondo tragedy. yes or no do you agree with that conclusion? >> well, i think it was part of the responsibility of its effective management is to understand the risks and take steps to mitigate the risk. the fact is there was no effective plan in place and capability to implement a plan before this accident occurred. >> so it's not that you agree, it is management. >> it is a failure of management to do the risk analysis and take steps to mitigate the risks.

>> i would support that come in just sir. >> on page seven of your testimony you state under the headline of reforming industry safety practices, quote, governor oversight must be accompanied by oil and gas industry's internal reinvention, sweeping reforms to accomplish less than a fundamental transportation. internal reinventions sweeping reforms and fundamental transformations frankly have an entire industry is what the implications of the result of the implications. the words of the alarming castoff wide net. i assume they are based on the thorough review of the hundreds of companies involved in u.s. energy production and not just three companies despite how large they are they are mentioned in the report. did the commission conduct such a review? >> we conducted a review of the incident itself of accident data

-- >> if you answer my question of the review was three companies out of perhaps thousands. >> it is 79 losses of control in the last whatever 20 years or so affecting a very large number of companies operating in the gulf coast. >> i understand. so, so the review is 3500, the number look at 3500 of offshore production and thousands of companies engaged in the production, but the conclusion was based on looking at three companies. >> welcome the inference is strong for the likelihood of the antioch risk with those three companies largely rest upon what we learn from the experience of those three companies, but we had a significant data about many other companies and their experiences that cause us to use the term systemic. >> i appreciate that your taking that inference from their but especially the inference drawn from the company's but frankly

casting a pretty wide net with your recommendations of packing thousands of companies. but -- >> if i could add to that, you made the illusion, and i had suggested if the united states had a four fatalities to one ratio in airline accidents, let's say norway or the united kingdom, i believe the american public would be outraged. that is the situation between the north sea and the gulf of mexico and i don't think that one company -- >> if i could reclaim my time. ..

not for a minute. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. that completes the first time, but several members have expressed an interest in a loop on first question that senator graham, i didn't ask you. i asked mr. reilly in the assault the time of the proceeds going to have to answer to you is that you want to work that. when they start. mr. grijalva had a follow-up. >> thank you very much. to me at the outset thank the gentleman for your presence here

and for a compelling report. i would -- the only question on page 142 to 1432 with the issue of the jones act became a comment that it was not indeed an impediment to getting foreign assistance or outside assistance to come to be a defense bill. also this comment they are. i'm sure the government insisted that they probably created more problems than they solved. but the question i see a do over some of my good friends found is amended the issue of systemic. we have here anything to report is compelling because it deals with the role of government and the lack of oversight on the part of the federal government and a contributing or to what we found it deals very directly systemic issues that occur within the management and operation of the industry. i think the report is compelling.

we might -- insofar as some he needs to be done. and if we want to raise the standard of oil production offshore, where it saves both for life and for the environment, then this would work needs to be responded to. the recommendations it made for legislative action are sound. i don't agree with all your recommendations, nor do i assumed every member agrees with everything in there. it is a sound framework. this principal senate it that we must deal with. i went to thank you for that, for the time you took a notice of the seriousness of which we are going to take this report. so thank you for your time to thank you the report as i said compelling, necessary and timely. >> thank you, sir. >> i thank the gentleman. when you go to mr. landry of louisiana. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm having trouble understanding

how y'all can come to the conclusion of the systemic failures by using those three companies are claiming that because thoset companies do such a large percentage of the work in the gulf of mexico, that every time they go on a job, they are using the same protocol and engineering for the different customers that they are doing business with. that simply is not true. there are different well-designed that are in different oil and gas companies. some of those well-designed, i might add has been around since the inception of deepwater trilling. and so, i don't understand how you came to this decision of the systemic failure. why not look at those oil and gas companies who have drilled successfully without incident, looking at the well design and

save this type of well designed seems to be a safe face. it certainly would save the taxpayers a lot of iraq receipt if y'all took a look at those different designs. she will take a look at the different designs? and did you take in mind that when those contractors work for different oil and gas companies, they don't follow the same protocol as an engineering specs? >> we did look at the design of this particular well in at least two companies made clear to us that they would not have chosen the design that bp did for that formation in that place. >> for mr. reilly, i apologize for cutting you off, but she told me earlier you took into account the 3200 with a 2500 wells that were chilled and deepwater. he told me it took into account their history and their success, but yet now you're telling me that he only took into account the well designs on bp.

>> conclusion of the well-designed use by bp at macondo was not an appropriate one for when the created more risk than necessary and as the two companies which is the basement of a two alternatives of the sort you suggest. >> i'm asking. i'm trying to clarify your answer. as you look at the other well designs and take into account when you issued your report telling us there is a systemic failure in the industry and we have to create these additional levels of yurok receipt, costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars when he made that recommendation. did you or did you not look at the history of the other deepwater wells, 2500 or so that i've been drilled in the gulf of mexico when he took into account issuing this report?

>> yes, sir, we did. let me say from the point of view of someone who considers one and 2500, not so impressive frankly if it's going to cost 40 or $50 billion should the economy of the area and the company involved. i think were trying to different conclusions from the success rate. i regulated the environmental protection agency to respect the number of one in a million, which was the maximum acceptable impact on mortality premature death associated with a certain decision, pesticide decision, for example. when a 2500 doesn't impress me as a positive record frankly. >> and certainly would make you look in the eyes of the people who are losing their jobs in louisiana who have built this industry, was basically been doing since 1947 off of that post and tell them that. i can tell you from living down there that safety is number one. it has been for a very, very

long time. >> it's been a decision to deny them their jobs and shut down every rate, the exploration reich is one that i rank as highly tendentious, excessive and hard to justify and it made that clear as has senator graham from the out. we would approach this in a more select a fashion so as not to penalize those companies that have not been specifically implicated in the disaster. after some short period of review and inspection which did in fact take place and they were cleared. so we're not here to defend the denial of jobs or against the resumption of activity and the gulf. very much we want to see a presale safely and effectively. >> i'll put your name and as a recommendation to take ms. brown's place. [laughter] >> congressman, i half -- i have to take some exception to this

statement that she made that we're recommending hundreds of millions of dollars of additional regulation. yes, we're recommending that there be an adequate, competent, politically insulated safety function within the u.s. department of the interior. i don't think those are our radical suggestions. number two, we're recommending that the industry, and other high-risk industries have done, assume more responsibility for their own evaluation of safety. that's no cost to the u.s. government and i think it's a very prudent suggestion to the industry and one which will contribute to the industry is long-term viability. so i just -- if you see something in our report that you think is hundreds of billions dollars or millions of dollars of additional expense and an excessive addition to

bureaucracy, i would like to be directed towards that he cast that was not our intention. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. >> thank you, mr. chairman. but the back drop that i introduced earlier today and that is with god the sales that have been canceled, offshore areas taken off the availability list to be killed off in the future, higher gas prices, lost jobs, i heard economy and a lot of that is because this report is being relied upon to continue more tory either divac joked, regulatory, however they want to be described. and it goes back to the system -- the systemic industrywide failures. cochairman william reilly stated none or january 6 release, my observation of the oil industry indicate there several exemplary

environmental records. tricky question from the outset of this tragedy is do we have a single company, that being bp, but under the federal consequences or a more pervasive problem of a complacent industry? given the document feelings about transocean and halliburton, both of which shared capture history of every ocean are reluctant to conclude we have a systemwide problem. that's your quote. >> based on whether you see of the consistency and the weight which this report is being given and the energy future of this country, i would respectfully ask the commission if they will amend the report, remove the word systemwide industry failure. >> congressman, how would you defend the presence of walrus protection and polar bears and response plan? for how would you defend

mr. hayward taught me there's no subsidy containment capability? or the inadequacy of the response technology and the failure to invest over the last 20 years after we experience a disaster in prince william sound. anything these week for themselves and the response plans for not complying to the three companies. all the majors we look that had the same -- literally the same response plans in the same concern for waller says it all the other things we know. and several ceos have said they found it in bears and can have a lot to do with their decision to make the while containment corporation which is a positive step on the part of the industry. so i don't think you can infer anything other than it sure looked like complacent fee. when people say we never thought it could happen and i include myself in that. we were complacent. i think the government was, the industry was, i was. >> again, the application for a

permit or place on cookie-cutter requirement of what was formally called at messiest issue. >> title make some them from the criticism. >> maybe there was a regulatory failure is part of it. i think we all agree there was. we'll agree bp at an integral part to play in this failure. unfortunately what is being condemned here is the entire industry as well as the energy security going forward. and i think it goes back to those words. industrywide systemic failure. i respectfully disagree. i don't think we have that type of a failure and i'd like to stay for the record those were thought to be struck from the court haired >> when they say at our report is 11 days old and the degree to which there has been a delay in permits or de facto moratorium has anything to do with this report and we certainly don't expect or didn't intend we would contribute to that.

we in fact we're assuming that a number of these recommendations could be implemented coterminous play with the resumption of the david and the part of the companies that weren't in any way involved in the macondo disaster. >> thank you. i yield that. >> the gentleman yields back. >> thank you, chairman. just one additional question. on page six of your testimony under the heading environmental review, you state the commission recommends quote a more robust than more formal interagency consultation process in which noaa has a heightened role and authority is obtained by the department of interior and quote. my question and i wanted to get your rational behind it. obviously, you know, the role was of great concern to the

commission. my question actually is, should the department of energy and commerce have an equal if not greater various in noaa and the rules and regulations that certainly have a great influence on our domestic energy production? >> well, let me clarify noaa is the number of the department of commerce. so assumedly through noaa it was used. >> department of commerce would be involved. but we were focusing on mayor as i mentioned in my opening statement a key fact to understand is that the relationship of the united states government to the offshore oil industry is not just as a regulator. it's not like the relationship of the department of transportation to the bus industry of america. it is also the relationship of the owner of the property, all

of that property out there in the gulf of mexico be on the safe women belongs to the people of the united states of america. we've made a decision that we will lease portions of that through oil companies under certain conditions to evaluate and they found, extract oil and gas. we have the same interest that if you owned a small shopping center, that you don't want to have a tenant in your center who was trashing it and it's going to make it impossible for other tenants to have a proximal enterprise. so i think we need to put ourselves in the possession of what should we be doing to assure that our children and grandchildren will have a gulf of mexico and this is a quality that we be proud to hand over at her inheritance. i think these recommendations

and particularly the recommendations of bringing the best science and we think the department of commerce annual represent this area to bayer in terms of what should be the conditions of our proposed tenant, the least of our property is not an improvement thing to do. >> as i came to congress two years ago, one of the things that just appalled me and this is over different administrations, different parties is the absolute lack of a national energy plan fits in this country. and we're talking about the outer continental shelf and offshore resources or onshore resources. frankly, you know, the energy department was formed for that very purpose to achieve energy independence i guess in the 80s when it happened. it has failed miserably, but i

think the proper steps obviously would be involved in this type of a process. >> i'm completely in agreement with that. in fact, it was my position and i think this is reflected in the report that you can't answer with the future of the offshore industry without answering the larger question. what is dark energy policy in the united states? i was telling bill in yesterday's newspapers there were some articles about the fact that the reincorporation had raised questions about whether the u.s. military could convert to a less fossil dependent navy, air force, army. they raised serious doubts about whether that can be done, which to me just underscores the importance of this industry for a fundamental national security. >> thank you. thank you for your testimony. i have additional questions but i will forward those along. >> thank you, mr. kolb.

>> thank you. and this shall deny swears last question. we all need to be outside enjoying the blizzard that's happening. [laughter] >> there's no place else to go. >> gentlemen, both of you have said that the resumption in full production of offshore drilling in terms of energy production is something that you want to see and that could be occurring as we make the other kinds of adjustments that we have to make to make the industry safe and our role in the government stronger. i'm one of the key recommendations that the commission made is that the federal oil and gas regulators that has been underfunded, i think they're getting less now than 20 years ago, that we create a dedicated funding stream for oil and gas fees to fund this so it's well-trained,

professional, and installation of independence. and yet as we're talking about this and the critical need to do with the production issue that is, consistently here by my colleague, we're also talking about reductions to 2006 levels, 2008 levels based on the resolution that were dealing with on the floor. so at some point, the full production restoration idea and concept you support as commissioners, with the back drop of not ever meeting the commission report in terms of providing a robust oversight regulatory function for government that is independent, how do you reconcile that one opinion the lack of resources on the other end? any comment would be fine. >> it is our recommendation that

like is the case with most other industries, industries you don't have this additional care eristic of being our tenants, we expect the airline industry, the telecommunications industry across the board virtually to pay for their own regulation. they are self-funded regulation. we did not see any compelling reason why that should not be true of this industry. so that would be our basic recommendation that would take congress action if for instance there were, as there is now, for the oil liability fund, there's a fee attached to each barrel of oil, i believe, that's both imported as well as domestically produced, which goes into that

fund. maybe we need to have a supplemental stream to go into a fund for the regulation of the industry so we can assure to the industry that we will have a competent, sustained ability. >> senator, one question if i may. you see a linkage and not an either or proposition ? >> i mean, either/or -- >> either you have the regulatory capacity and the source is to deal with the demand for full production and if that linkage doesn't occur, is it's an either/or proposition >> you can't have one without the other. >> the answer is i don't think it's in the interest of the american people not to have adequate standard again impart because we have just seen what the consequences are too a lot of very innocent people and we

have seen what the consequences are to an important piece of real estate that belongs to all the people of america. >> cat, a think the question is reducing interiors level 22,006, 2008, that directly impact your recommendation in terms of, that directly impact your recommendation in terms of the resource capacity in the overall capacity of regulators and oversight. that does, i think does not help the safety demands for offshore drilling. that's all part of the recommendations. >> we are quite clear that the quality of regulation has been insufficient, that an industry which did not used to be high-risk industry as it has receded so heavily has become the industry itself needs to take the steps suggested by this catastrophe, but so does

government. other governments have done so after their own catastrophes. he mentioned the united kingdom and norway which responded to severe accident they had by separating the revenue generating functions for the regulatory function in significantly improving the quality of the regulator. senator graham mentioned in the united kingdom, the oil and gas industry lobbies for more appropriations for the regulator because they recognize the quality and the regulator as did mr. taylor's son, the chairman of exxon mobil and the president fishel u.s.a., both of them mention the quality of regulation is essential to the quality of industrial activity. that's all we're really suggesting. so to try to save money that bom are we having a co-of the oil and gas production in the gulf would reenter% israeli penny wise foolish.

>> the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. mcclintock from california. >> i like to ask unanimous consent to search into the record the petroleum institute entitled the impact of the gulf of mexico deepwater permit on oil and natural gas david 2010, which i cited earlier tonight souvenir copies for our lucky panelist. >> without objection so ordered. vacillate to ask unanimous consent to include "the wall street journal" editorial which i reference. the mac without objection. >> mr. chairman, if i were to summarize what we've learned today, it's his. we faced an engineering issue, it will preventer failed and it failed catastrophically because enormous environmental and economic devastation.

before this commission was impaneled, we did not know why the flow of preventer failed. after the commission concluded its work and issued this report, we still don't know why that will preventer failed. we don't know why it failed because the commission never even bothered to look at the blow of preventer co. which according to "the wall street journal" is resting on a talk in the wee fianna. we have never had a failure like this one. until we find out why it failed, could happen again. it could happen at any time in the commission has not advanced our understanding of how to prevent it one bit. the contrast between this commission's work on a larger commission after the challenger's disaster is staggering. if the rogers commission operates in the same manner, would still have no idea what caused the challenger to explode

or how to prevent it in the future. we have before us a report offering bureaucratic prescriptions to an engineering problem offered by bureaucrats rather than an engineering prescription authored by engineers. i don't know exactly how the committee would've you the issue from here. i would certainly seek the chairman's guidance, but i would recommend that we take whatever action is necessary to impanel a panel of engineering expert to go down to the dock in louisiana, retrieved the low of preventer, tear it apart piece by piece, find out what caused it to fail and do so before it happens again. >> gentleman yield? >> i would just respond to that if i might. sir, i think you can draw an

analogy between the blowout preventer and a seatbelt in an automobile accident. it's obviously important to the survival of some of the 50 wasn't fastened, but it doesn't really explain where the accident occurred. we explain where the accident occurred here prefigured and identified all of the major contributors to the decisions of their technological consequence is, engineering consequences that led to the disaster, examining the blow of preventer is not going to cause the other impacts we uncovered to go away. they are there. they are distressing. they do implications for policy and we try to draw them. >> i want to thank both your witnesses for being here today. i know you had a long day. he started at 10:00 in the senate and a very, very much appreciate your willingness to stay here. so some of our members can have

another explanation or clarification of what's going on. i know there will be some other questions that numbers, probably on both sides come would like to ask you. and if he would agree to respond in writing to those questions, we very much appreciate that. >> we will do that, mr. chairman. we have a staff a thing for another five weeks, four weeks and we will use them to the very end to the extent they allow that. i would just like to say -- i would like to say we very much appreciate the attentiveness, the interest of this committee and thoroughness of the questions were received and understand the seriousness of different kinds of the other about our report and about the conclusions we drew. we hope it's helpful to the deliberations of the committee and relatively modest proposals we made and i think they are modest in terms of cost and your perceived disruptions i

mentioned are looked at seriously and perhaps implemented. >> well, i thank you for that. to me just mention again and reiterate what i said at the start of this, but the bp well broken we had to find out what went wrong. we will continue to do that as i mentioned my opening statement there's two more reports. we will look at what they have to say and draw hopefully some conclusions from that. but i also will reiterate what i also said my opening response. what we do here will send a very, very strong signal into what i think it's very, very critical long-term. and long-term is the energy security of our country. you alluded to that, so the balance we have to make is make sure we continue to have a robust industry, especially in a down economy. so with that, i want to thank all of the members can for being

here and especially for the two of you to stay for this long-time. and with that, if there's no further business, yeah, no further business. the median stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> no question 9/11 we defined the presidency because it made it abundantly clear i am most important job is to protect the country. and i made a lot of controversial decisions to do that, many of which i describe in the book. the truth of the matter is if i had to do them over and would've done them again.

>> i need to stay for the record, i philosophically have always been opposed to taxpayer dollars being used for political advocacy of any kind. >> senate today took up a resolution honoring those that were wounded and killed in the recent shootings in tucson. the resolution also praises the first responders. here is arizona senators johnmrc mccain and jon kyl on theesidint measure. >> madam president, ththe resolution states that we honor

the victims and heroes of the shooting on january 8, 2011 in l tucson, arizona.ation a and as we all know any nation and the world knows that on january 8, the gunmen opened fire at a congress on your corner event hosted by representative gabrielle giffords in tucson, arizona, killing six and wounding 13 others. among those who lost their lives -- those who lost their lives with 9-year-old christinae taylor-green, dorothy morris, m, judge john roll, phyllis schneck and dorwin stoddard and gabrielle matthew zimmerman. christina taylor green with a 9-year-old daughter of john and roxanna green. she was born on september grader with an average interest in government, who was recently let it to the student council at

mesa berti elementary school. dorothy morris, 76 years old attended the january 8th event with george, her husband of over 50 w years and had two daughters and was also critically injured as he tried to shield her from l the shooting. john roll, who i will talk aboua later on is a pennsylvania native who was 63 years old and began his professional career af a bailiff in 1972, has appointed the federal bench in 1991 and became the chief judge for the district of arizona in 2006. wife, maureen, father to hisrand three sons and grandfather, 25fe grandchildren and heroically attempted to shield ron barber phyllis schneck, the proud g

father of three, grandmother of seven and great-grandmother fros new jersey is spending the winter in arizona and with a 79-year-old church volunteer and new york giants fan. fan dorwin stoddard, a 76-year-old retired construction worker and volunteer at the mountain avenue church of christ is credited with shielding his wife who maya be a longtime friend he marriede while they were in their 60s edo was also injured in the injr shooting. gabrielle matte used femininend men was 30 years old and engaged to be married served as director of community outreach toswoman e rep wffords was a social worker before serving with representative giffords.h we all know that gabrielle giffords was the target of the attack and was critically injured and we have receivedmely extremely good news and not her

condition has been upgraded frol critical to good.nd is that incredible news and hisl of heart need to all of us. in 13 others were also wounded in the shooting, including ron barber and pamela starting who epresentative to r giffords and several individuals, including patricia, mace, army colonel bill badger,o retired, was also wounded in the shooting. roger sulzberger, joseph zamudio, daniel hernandez junio, adam ballis and that are stephed rael helped apprehend the gunmee and mrs. the injured thereby risking their lives for the safety of others. now, some of the actions took place during this tragedy have been carried extensively in the media, our reaction of the

people in tucson and arizona toe this tragedy has been incredibli there's so many stories of courage and bravery associated with this action. the the quick reaction of our police remarkable, not to mention the yncredible and extremely rapid b care provided by the doctors and nurses and caregivers in tucsont so in this great tragedy that has taken place, we can again be comforted with the knowledge that our citizens react to it in the way that americans do and with hair with them, with courage and the sacrifice. so i think it is entirely

appropriate that this resolution be passed as one of the first ac acts of thets new congress of te want to thank all americans for their concern, their prayers and the sympathy and support that they have extended, not only too the vic jones, their families, but also the people of arizona.e weeks and years ahead as to how it was possible for this event to take place. don't and i don't pretend to know all of the answers. c he was clearly a two-inch individual, an individual who perhaps we could argue, althougl i can't say for certain, shouldr have been brought to thention, s

attention. his mental illness should have been brought to the attention og the properht authorities. law ta we do have a law that provides for such a thing in the state of arizona.ariz at theona. same time, the questn needs to be asked, if it -- was his actions that we now have become very aware of, were they aware -- where they made awarehy to the proper number of people that they would take such action? the fact is that it happened. the fact is that we who ared rei elected representatives willcono continue to have contact with our constituents. we will do so and not be this deterred by the actions of this deranged individual. we cannot allow the actions ofof the deranged individual to fro prevent us from interact team in a fundamental way, with our

constituents. they deserve it and i am able confident that we will be able to continue to crack this of the town hall meetings, congress on your corner, the kinds of activities that are in some ways not entirely unique to the united states of america, butmor certainly isn't practiced in most parts of the world. so we are encouraged by the news concerning gabrielle giffords and we will harvard the hope ane hurt duties in the united states congress to representing the people of southern arizona. famy we pray for the family of judge gavegave their lives. setor kyl senator kyl and i attended the various memorial services and in tucson. wh to me, way, obviously, with deep

sorrow over the event. yet at the same time, with thet great deal of pride and appreciation for our fellow citizens in arizona in tucson who have reacted in a heroic and giving and loving sharing guesse fashion. sonata president, i guess webe t will be voting on this issue sometime this afternoon. i know that other colleagues of mine will be speaking on behalfa of thilfs resolution. with that, madam president, i i introduced legislation to name the united states courthouse inn yuma, arizona the job role united states courthouse. the

is that legislation at the deske >> no. des >> i subject the accents of aidh quorum.ell >> clerk will call the roll. >> mr. akaka.ther >> adam president, i ask unanimous been sent to theoffic: quorum call w be suspended.

>> without objection.88 >> i called bill number 188 en masse for immediatewill consideration. >> clerk will report. >> bill received. iroduce >> ghana president, i'm pleased senator kyl that would designate the soon-to-be constructed federal courthouse in yuma, arizona to be named in honor ofe chief judge john rose who died tragically during a senseless aa act of violence against arizonans in tucson earlier this month. i had the distinct privilege ofe knowing and working with chief r judge ruled for many years. in fact, it was my honor to recommend him to presidentush

george herbert walker bush for nomination to the federal bench he served in 1991.ith he served with distinction.y so most recently, judge rolle became known by so many in the state of arizona.udicial the judicial conference and manr in congress as a tireless advocate for the plaintiffs, arb defendants and judgesy in to ass arizona, by working to secure ct additional funding and resources to assist the court in its heavy caseload. the morning of the shooting, he was a mind to speak to congresswoman giffords, who was also a friend, about his efforts to have the ninth circuit declared a judicial emergency if the district of arizona. he died doing what he did each and every day, working to ng our state were capable of handling the growing caseload si while ensuring swift justice for all.s all jetro exemplify the qualities all presidentsi should seektes candidates for the federalench.

banks. intelligence and humanity have l integrity and fidelity to the law. he embodied all these qualities andd many more. additionally he was known as the faer and kind neighbor, dedicated father and husband and a loyal friend. she will now be known also as a hero. janry the arizona daily star reported on january 20, 2011, and i the quote, surveillance footage of the junior at eight shooting in campaign in tucson show that judge rolle used his body as a e shield to cover the wounded rona barber.to paul then took a bullet to the back and lost his life in the h, process. the judge is a hero in the county shares for chief rick caster garside. said." the article states that thehe suspected gunman shot arbor,sswn congresswoman giffords district for almost simultaneously.ously

moved barber toward the crawl ground and crawled beneath the table. said. both then got on top of barber. judge role is responsible forlie directing mr. barber out of the line of fire and helped saved his life caster garside.d mr. barber told the arizona sta" daily tire, that just gives admn more admiration for the judge than i everhe had.oll was a john roll was a dear, dear man. mr. barber and judge rolle had r been friends for many years, dating back to the days of college students at the university of arizona. the a morse recently, they were fundif together with the arizonacourthn congressional delegation to secure funding for a new federal courthouse in yuma, arizona, to alleviate congestion at the the tucson federal courthouse. in fact, judge will have just a reviewed the architectural drawings of the new courthouse weeks before his death and told

my office that he was very pleased with the t design.very it's the hope of myself and ario senator kyl and every member of the arizona delegation that then architectural designs will soon include t the name of chief jude john roll, lyon facility. friend did the same jurists, hero more. our status pluse. the good man,e true enable advocate for justice for all inju the greek arizona. for this reason i ask my fellow senators to join me in passing this legislation, to allow theaz new yuma federal courthouse to courthouse. >> thank you, mr. president.ent. yesterday i spoke to the event of january 8 in tucson, arizonab

specifically referencing theore people who we are honored by the resolution that is before us aca today.dy, democts at 2:30 this afternoon will havs an opportunity to act as a bodyl democrats and republicans from all parts of our country to recognize the people who were injured, the families of those who were killed and of course the heroes of the tragic tucson shooting. esennot born into junior eight,r representative gabrielle tucson giffords arrived as a tucson safeway store for her congress on your corner c of the period e was there to meet with constituents, which is something that she enjoyed doing very much. and this was the first such event ofch the year.s joined by she had hosted others previously. she was joined members of her staff. when the work pam simon, ron barber, gabriel zimmerman and daniel fernandez, an intern. a congresswoman giffords greater constituents would find it toloi speak with her. as

judge john roll, chief judge of the u.s. district court ofhief o arizona, a personal friend of mine. like most mornings, yet attended mass.ass. then he decided to stop at the safeway to thank thetance congresswoman for h overwhelming caseload. also attending the event was 9-year-old christina taylor had green light, swimming giffords has recently won elective t office. third-grader had been elected to the student council and mayor said a day elementary school. whittemore center has been george, retired buried, airlinee pilot were attending the eventtt great grandmother spent it in ic her sofrom new jersey was theres well as for tour winds and matty stoddard.

all these people are waiting to gresswoman giffords is the gunman approached and shot the congresswoman in the head, then turning the gun on the others in line.oman gabrielle zimmerman, judge. rolle, christina taylor-green, dorothy morris, phyllis schneck and dorwin stoddard were all killed. george morris, not the stoddard, pamela simon, ron barber and tha congresswoman were injured alona with eightn others. those who were killed had muchho more t wo offer in their lives,e gave the correspondence director of community outreach was only 30 years old your dues engaged to be married.le st killed while rushing to assist others. he worked closely with my tucson staff. judge rolle was not only a very distinguished and respectedl ine jurists, but with no most of all in the tucson community for hisd kindness and courtesy.otect ron

he was killed as he tried to whd protect ron barber who had beenn shot justts moments before.chria christina taylor, as iioned, mentioned, was only nine w year, old, third-grader. ricky morris was married for 50 years to george and he was injured trying to protect his of wife. i the couple has two daughters. i met one of them when i visited georgia in the facility in which he is recuperating, where i was last friday. phyllis, like others in thise wf group, with a volunteer at her church. cooking.ls c dorwin stoddard invention was av church volunteer and he too was shot as he drove to the ground to cover w his wife, who escaped with wounds to her legs.ell. i had no opportunity to visit friday as well. as we know the gunman was prepared to take more lives.artd his plans for more bloodshed were afforded by brave of theedn

citizen. these stories have been documented in the media in the past few weeks and just a few or the historic acts are worth recounting here. hea after a bullet grazed his head and took into the ground, bill badger, is 74 euros retired arm, colonel and pretty good shape for my dad got up and helped he hold the gunman down until rived. police arrived.anna shopping that morning at safeway. as she was leaving the store, the shootingwa b began.to tid according to reports, she brushed to the aid of mr. barben after bullet hit an artery in his leg. two and is the mother of two u.s. iq marines who have been deployed to iraq and afghanistan multiple times. and i mentioned yesterdayal, hoi visiting ron barber in the hd, hospital, holding in his handgan repeating over and over again how she h saved his life. such are the multiple acts of bravery and kindness.ion daniel fernandez, who was in the calvary at the state of the union speech last night as a

21-year-old intern for some congresswoman giffords. he rushed to her aid right afte, the incident and had some which training in first aid applied prevented her from bleeding more than she did. he stayed with her even after emergency service personnel arrived. 61-year-old patricia masque of ammunition he was hoping to in reload in a sweatband. steve brill, a doctrine for phyn urgency room halt pursue andenfc then helped care for theem the injured. is the gunman was trying to reload his weapon, robert sulzberger josh sauce give her wrestled him down from behind in joseph zamudio ran toward the scene from a nearby store when he heard the shot being fired se and helped subdue the gunman again until law enforcement officersil arrived. were obviously grateful for the effects of bravery. we're proud of the people as mentioned, but also all of the y

emergency workers who quickly te arrived on the scene and pr provided lifesaving aid and comfort to the injured and theen very crucial moment following the attack. edd i must mention also the incredible team of professionals. the surgeons another hailes told personnel a university medical n center. or part of that facility iny she southern arizona in a certain a theyll showed their competence d dealing with all of the woundeds and some who died. it has now been more than two, weeks since the tragedy and the obvious they still grieving. we all pray that they find find comfort in the days ahead and we make sofull recoveries. in recent days we've received some good news in that regard as those who are wounded are beginning to recover in lth the hospital. our friend and colleague, gaby giffords, though she remains in

serious condition, we are heartened to hear positive reports from her.there's that we wish her the very best as she begins a new phase of her recovery in houston. shock mr. president, the tragedy in tucson witsh a shot to assault. it's difficult to comprehend that such horror can be visited their families.brought t the in some respects however we seeo once again how it is part of the best in good people.f so not a perfect tens in theed heroes of this tragic event, senator mccain and i asked her we c colleagues in the senate passed senate resolution 14. we can do little to bring solace to those who lost loved ones, am but we can affirm that this boda is t united in its grief for the fall and come its admiration for the heroes and prayers for the injured.

>> at today's defense department briefing, jeff brown discussed

the case of private first class bradley manning has been accused of leaking classified documents to wikileaks. mr. brown also comments on political unrest in tunisia, egypt and lebanon. this is 40 minutes. .. in mexico. now unfortunately we have received word due to illness the mexican secretary of national

defence general will not be able to attend tomorrow's session as he had hoped and the meeting will have to be postponed once again. this victory, however, will still go on and they will conduct a bilateral engagement with canadian minister defense peter mckay. they will discuss ongoing u.s.-canada defense issues and areas of cooperation including of course our mutual efforts in afghanistan, as for mexico the secretary will look for other opportunities in the future to engage in the counterparts, but nothing to announce in terms of a makeup date at this point. we will head down to omaha nebraska in order to participate in friday's change of command ceremony for strategic command at the air force base.

this eventful day visit to the chance to thank for his decades of service in the military and welcome his successor general bob taylor who has most recently then the commander of air force space command. also participating in the change of command is chairman mike mohan. the chairman will be flying in from brussels where he arrived with the nado committee chief. the chairman also met today with his russian counterparts as well as part of the nato russia council session that took place today. also on friday for those of you who are not traveling with us back here in this very room, this a good defense for personnel readiness has less general cartwright, the vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff will conduct the first of what will likely be a series of

briefings on how we are proceeding with the implementation of the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell." i'm sure many of you will be interested in that. likely friday afternoon i think. i know there are impeachment in the morning and then we will meet with you all midafternoon. so with that, welcome back. >> on that subject the president mentioned briefly last night wanting to move forward. can you get a sense of how quickly the military is coming to my forward from the training course that they are going to be -- >> i'm going to interdict so you can think of another question yy deflect this one. that's why we're having the briefing friday. these are the guys running this. they will address those and other issues, trust me. i'm not going the library beyond that. we have another one want to come back? all right.

>> is the secretary working on authorizing additional military churches and in guantanamo and does he think the new military commissions system will result in verdicts of of international credibility in order to put these cases behind us once and for all? >> i think as you know there was an exhibit of order signed by the president of the united states the days after he took office right about now, two years ago, right about now deals with this. this is a matter that i think is best addressed to the white house as they go about trying to figure out how to proceed with the closure of the guantanamo bay and the end to the kitchen of those still being held and who cannot be returned to their home countries. but i have no development on that to share with you today. >> the secretary had to authorize resuming or rather

starting new and the executive order was signed back in january of 2009 the secretary had to sign a subsequent order for this department in terms of how what was going to proceed compliance with the executive order. that's all that was common direction to the department based on the order from the president. that does in fact remain in effect while the inner agent steal deacons -- agency works and how we're going to propose guantanamo bay and deal with those people there who cannot be returned to their home country safely. those who can be had adjudicated or who in we have to be held on a permanent basis. but i have nothing new to provide on that front. perhaps my friends of the justice or the white house. >> is it true the have not been able to tie private manning to

essentially make a link between the two? >> what i will say is as much as i would like to way into this this is as you know a criminal investigation so it would be inappropriate for me to speak of any specificity to these issues, but by what avail myself of this opportunity to read much or more and you all to be extraordinarily careful about how you report on the story because one thing i do feel comfortable telling you is that this case is being taken extremely seriously by the investigator both here and the defense department and of course at the department of justice. they are hard at work on building a case. so any pronouncements about a

connection or lack of connection, those that have been found or yet to be found are just premature not this point. diverge urge the devotee to proceed with caution on this and probably most stories of that matter. i'm not in the position unfortunately to tackle that as directly as i would like to, but that is my admonition to you >> he's not being held in solitary confinement. that is a misnomer in this case. let me describe how the private first command is being held. he is not in this letter confinement, he is not in isolation, he is a maximum custody detainee in the prevention of injuries that this. he is not on suicide watch. he's being held in the same sections with other detainees. he's allowed to watch television

men allowed to read newspapers to get his about one hour a day of exercise. he is in a cell by himself but that is like a free single other pretrial detainee at the brigham. it happens every individual is confined to his or her own self. he's been provided well-balanced nutritious meals three times a day and receives visitors and mail and writes letters. he were to meet with doctors and attorneys. he's allowed to make telephone calls and he is being treated just like every other detainee with assertions by liberal boulders or network reporters or others that he is being mistreated or somehow treated differently than others and isolation are just not accurate and i'm glad you ask the question and i hit the button to clear that matter up once and for all.

>> that being said he's going to spend 23 of every 24 hours in that selwa himself. he's not about to exercise in the cell, he's not allowed to arbitrarily write letters to specifically ask for anything more than say one book at the time. is there any concern that was referred for the firm and six ecologists who spoke with him and examined him recommended that he not be under protective order. there is a question exactly how the commander -- what criteria is being used to keep him under this order for such a long period of time considering he is still in a pretrial. >> just as though he is not being treated any worse than a detainee he is not being treated any better than any other detainee.

he is not going to receive special privileges which is what you are asking him to receive. he is being treated exactly like everyone else is being treated. that is appropriate we treat them all equally and i don't understand why devotee the need for an exception to those rules to be made for private manning or anyone else for that matter. >> are there other prisoners have been under the protective order for the length of time private manning has? >> it's probably a question best addressed to my colleague in terms of the population at the brigham, how long someone has been there versus others i don't believe that this is an unusual decline usually long period of time. the case is being built to prosecute him on the charges we are again to correct another misreport. yesterday there were cable news reports yesterday that privet manning is being held without

charge, not just being held in the positions the media thought was inappropriate but that he was being held without charge and how one american that is you all know who work in this building and receive the to charge back in july he most certainly has been charged and he's not only been charged with illegally downloading classified information, but he has been charged with disseminating classified information to people on authorized to receive it. so those are very serious charges levied against him related to a discrete incident involving mostly the downloading of the gunship video from iraq but also cables as well mentioned back in july. he is as we mentioned a person of interest in the larger weeks by wikileaks on a tactical field reports and so on. but i think the matter of which he is being held as completely appropriate and completely

consistent with how any and all detainee's at the break are treated. >> the protective order is not designed to punish him for being charged with those crimes. it's supposed to protect him. >> when one is confined in the parade it is not just for their protection we are worried we are also worried about our protection. he's charged with a very serious crimes. that's why you isolate somebody behind bars and you can find someone so they can all these cape, cannot possibly come at the kind they are alleged to have done against. so i think you have a little backwards. if you have it that the people he's being held in the u.n. protection in the manner he's being held. that may be that there are reasons that they think that it is for his own benefit that he be held so.

he's being held behind bars because he is deemed a threat that he has been alleged to have committed a very serious crime that potentially undermines the nation's security therefore he needs to be confined during the course of a trial. but what i come back to time and time again is the notion that the manner of his confinement is not in the least different from the manner anyone else is being held. spec anybody over that particular order. >> to keep commend it to the protective order in i'm not sure i know what you're talking about killing by these conditions do you the manner it is being held and my understanding is this consistent with how every other person is being held. the one exception to that could be the suicide watch issue. he was placed on suicide watch as i and the stand for two days so that can be a difference between how others in the brig were being held.

but the manner in which he's being held isn't punishment for any behavior that this is a standard protocol for how people at the biggar held especially people with a gravity of the charges he has faced. nick? >> since you mentioned me by name and implication reporting which would be incorrect couple of questions. >> fire away. >> the great commander at quantico and putting private manning on suicide watch for two days last week did he violate pravachol? >> my understanding is that he did not and that despite your reporting to suggest doctors of the facility can make a call of that nature. but i've been told is the commander is ultimately responsible for the well-being and confinement of everyone in his church. and he has the wherewithal to

make decisions based upon input and others including doctors about how it is best to treat people given the circumstances. he made a judgment call it sounds like he put him under suicide watch for a period of today's but as we understand it he was well within his rights to do so was the commander. >> is it within his authority to put someone on suicide watch for disciplinary purposes? >> i frankly am not aware of all the regulations he operates under but i would imagine as the commander he has extraordinary discretion in terms of how best to run the facility, how best to protect the well-being of the people charged with safekeeping and i don't know all that goes into making the decision about one -- win one needs to be watched more carefully in the

event they may be considering doing harm to themselves. >> when is he taken off suicide watch at the urging of the army lawyers? >> i don't know, but even if it were the urging the will to lead to have to be at the judgment of the brick commander the what the appropriate course of action and he wouldn't have done it unless he thought is the best way to proceed the well-being of people there and of course private manning's well-being. okay? >> can you tell us if in fact there is evidence that private manning was ever in direct contact with wikileaks? >> i think i've answered this question and was put to me by john ever the need to -- jennifer. i am not in the position to answer them directly and i'm not in the elaborate other than to

say that it would be inappropriate given the fact this is an ongoing investigation for me to answer that with the specificity i would like to in leverage to talk to the fact this is an ongoing investigation it is -- this is received the highest level of attention in this department, department of justice there are many resources devoted to investigating this and bringing a case against those responsible for this breach of national security. so i think it is way too soon to make pronouncements with the kind of definitive miss the dicey and some of the reporting given where we still are in this investigation. >> do you find you have information that in fact manning was in the right contact -- >> i am not implying -- i am not

implying. >> you can respond how you like -- you can infer what you like but i am not planning anything other than what i said which is very clear i'm not going to wait under the ongoing investigation but later she to be careful because it is still very much in progress and would be premature to draw any definitive conclusions where we are veazey correct connections, a web of connections found, not found, any of that. we are not and you are not, no one is in a position yet to draw those conclusions. >> are there still a party is being investigated? >> it is broad and it is the best question directed at the justice department but understanding is this is a very broad robust investigation that will look any and every place to

find all of those who made or may not have been involved in the week of the classified information. >> arthu lummis? at me finish this up and then we will come over to you. >> because of wikileaks as a disconnection very involved many high level military officials are under investigation because wikileaks and my question is as for this wikileaks is concerned as far as wikileaks is concerned what have you done. there's been many other countries u.s. defense -- >> still on the wikileaks for the future [inaudible]

>> you have to talk to the cronies you'd have to talk to them. >> [inaudible] do you have -- if anybody has connection with the wikileaks. >> i am not aware of any specific engagements with regard to the conversations with regard to fallout from anything that has been disclosed by wikileaks in the u.s. in the military relationship. we've gone to great lengths and all of our bilateral relationships to differ advanced warning to our friends and allies around the world about what we are potentially in the documents. i know our colleagues stayed the

same things on the diplomatic basis so we have been worried forthright about this and obviously it's been an embarrassing and i think people lost sight a little bit about how damaging this has been in terms of diplomatic relations and in terms of the potential harm and in terms of the fallout and the intelligence sharing relationships. these are consequences that haven't received as much attention as they deserve to receive. >> there has been a lot of controversy in canada the last few months about the cost whether they can afford it. to what degree is the sector concerned about canadian wavering on the of 35 and how much will he make in his discussions with his counterparts? >> if we understand the politics

are up there it is such a hot-button issues like understand that the opposition party is making a great deal of that i'm sure it will be a matter for discussion for 63 gates and the minister. i'm sure it will be a matter that will come when the two of them conducted press conference tomorrow no afternoon. i think he will be able to speak more directly to this tomorrow. >> if you have a more specific question i'm happy to answer it but obviously our international partners are crucial to keeping the program cost effective. it is obviously blown the in cost upwards of $90 million a copyright. right now that is too high and we are determined to drive the cost down. our partners are in need obviously because the more quantity you by the more it will

drop so we are always trying to work with those countries committed to this to keep them committed because it is the overall good not just the program. but the defense posture of the world this is guinn to be the backbone of our fleet for decades to come and will be hopefully for our allies as well and there will not be a plan in the sky that can manage its capabilities for the f-22 so we are still committed to this program. >> we have to talk about it. we certainly hope they are. i've never heard wavering on the part of the minister of mckay on this issue but there are just politics at work in canada like many of the countries we visited and we have to be understanding and respectful of those concerns but ultimately there are

national security considerations the canadian government needs to take into consideration just as we and our other allies have. >> they're reducing is going to be have the lead card to have a relationship [inaudible] after the release of wikileaks. islamic i don't know why it would be harder with the mexican military than any other military that's named in the security breach. we are having to work double time to reassure our allies that we can protect classified information and guard secrets and that they can trust us. that is an ongoing process that is going to take months if not years to rebuild the

credibility. but at the end of the day as the secretary said a few months ago countries don't do business with us necessarily because they like us or trust us. they do business with us because this in the national interest and the national security interest to do so. that's why more countries, more militaries and i think ever before partnering with us, exercising, planning with us, cooperating with us. >> 63 clinton mentioned on monday [inaudible] >> i don't have anything new on that. >> we've seen the major changes and siccative brigades concerned about these changes and could these changes affect the

relationship with its partners in the region for example the military aid? >> well, let me -- >> that's a lot and these are three separate fast-moving situations that the secretary and others here in this department and frankly throughout the government are monitoring closely as the evils. let me remind you we have no military relationship with to nisha, -- tunisia and we have an evolving military relationship with lebanon i think since to those in six since the syrians pulled their forces out of lebanon we have pursued a closer military relationship i think investing in providing

assistance of $600 million to lebanon since 2006. so i think if your question deals with where do we go from here in light of development in lebanon and egypt and visa de our military assistance, i would probably urge you to first and foremost talk to state because the assistance is run out of there. but we are looking at this closely. in the case of lebanon we are looking at the situation as it plays out and we will need to see what the final makeup of the lebanese government looks like before we make any decisions regarding our relationship including military assistance. hezbollah controlled the government would obviously have an effect on our bilateral relationship with lebanon, but i think states should take it from here in terms of the ultimate impact that may or may not have

on our military relationships and financial assistance. with regards to egypt, just a point of fact these of sprung up in the last couple of days i think the white house has spoken at length the president last night robert gibbs today this was a transcript out that he should take a look at this week we are hosting senior egyptian military leaders of the pentagon for the annual bilateral defense talks before to the mother through cooperation committee which is chaired jointly by assistant secretary defense and lieutenant general the chief of staff of the egyptian armed forces. so, that's just an example of how engaged we are with the egyptians even as these

developments have taken place on the streets and elsewhere which i think the state and the white house have spoken to in terms of our concerns about how they proceed in terms of nonviolence and how they are reacted to by the government and so forth. yes, tony. >> i've got about seven minutes. >> to marlo the service is going to be looking at the leak of the the. when the air force discloses the criminal department agrees it was a critical era on the source selection. fast forward a couple of months as the department hold that view that it will air or not have an impact on the source selection? >> i don't think our position on this matter has changed. it was unfortunate, it was a mistake, but ultimately the

forensics that were done have assured us that it did not result in a in the proprietary or information being unfairly shared. so i think we have subsequent to that taken measures just to be safe to ensure that if indeed either party or both parties have seen what was inadvertently sent to them they both had equal access to the same information and we also taken measures in terms of an after action to figure out how the heck this occurred. obviously it is our hope and expectation that this would not affect either the wording of the contract which there is no reason for it to or anyone's decision in the week of that award to protest.

so any way but there is going to be a hearing on this matter that given the interest in the subject you should tune in to. >> the memoirs are coming out in february 8th. [inaudible] >> i'm sure they are inappropriate for a former secretary defense have been taken. i'm not privy to what specifically was done on the case of secretary rumsfeld, but i'm sure the appropriate protocols were followed. >> [inaudible] you may have somebody check into that. >> you want me to speak to my colleagues, they aren't my guys, they are my colleagues. >> i don't have much time. mick, you've had your shot. >> could you elaborate on the decision to grant permission to

the japanese company on the f35? >> when we were in japan you were all aware of this we spoke to our japanese counterparts about their desire to upgrade their tactical air fleet. we think there are a least three products they should strongly consider and we offer to provide them the kind of technical information they would need to make a decision as to which aircraft they want to pursue. the of 35 is one of three. the f-18 as well as the f-15 for the others, but we can give you that. that's where that stands. if i may divert to an unrelated but somewhat related topics, the jay 20 stories that i have seen over the past couple of weeks

since we have been back i think have been a little over the top and i read these things and people state definitively that there was a successful test of the j20, and i think that is another case of as being a little premature here. what we know is that a plan that looks different than any other they've produced that they claim to be the jade 20 have a short test flight when we were in beijing. we don't know but the capabilities of the plan use all video of. we don't know yet what the capabilities of our of the engine that propelled the plan and we don't know if it is a fifth generation mengin. we don't know if indeed it is as stealthy as the cleaned it to be. it's too early to have made those determinations that i think it's equally early for you

all to be making pronouncements about the success or achievements of test generation capability. furthermore, the notions we have been caught by surprise on this are also off base. we talked abut the pursuit of the j24 long time and that is why we have pursued not just the f-22 to deal with any scenario involves indulging in china but also the s 35 to the tune of nearly 2500 planes the program of record so we are well aware of this evil thing capability and what we saw last weekend changed the strategic calculus at all but because we don't get -- what was talked on this issue was by the time the at

operationally significant numbers of this aircraft we wouldn't just of the 187 f-22 which would be unmatched but we would also have an abundance of 535 in addition to all the other f-16's that are 4.5 generation quality. so i would urge everybody to be -- to slow down on the characterization of the j20 given what little we know about it. estimate it wasn't in the report this year or last year so how can you say that we've been warning about this? the j20 wasn't mentioned in the china report. >> i have to go back and look at the report -- can i finish my thought? i have to go back and look at the report but i would find it hard to believe -- excuse me. let me finish -- i find it hard

to believe china's pursuit of a fifth generation aircraft wouldn't have been noted in the report. but we can go back and take a look and provide you an answer from the policy on why it wasn't. okay? >> is there evidence there was the u.s. technology in that plan? >> listened, not as far as i know that as i'm telling you we don't know a whole lot about what is in this plan right now. that's why i am urging you to be cautious. here are the chinese that haven't spoken as previous to our visit and the public testing of this aircraft have never as far as i know publicly even acknowledged the program. now all of a sudden you see people speak at length including the report noted from yesterday somebody in the chinese military stating it is insulting for people to insinuate that they got this by procuring parts of

the u.s. aircraft down to kosovo and reverse engineer to help come up with their own capability. they say that's not the case. no reason to disbelieve them. but i also don't know yet whether there is still capability on that aircraft or that there is a new engine on that aircraft. we don't know yet so that is why i am urging you to be carefully and perhaps a little skeptical as you are in your questioning of us and our capabilities. okay? i've really got to go but there is these two and then i've got to go. yes. >> president obama last week the president is mentioned on the issue of the deployed troops is

it the peninsula or? >> i think i'm getting your question to be in light of the threat we see emanating from the peninsula from pyongyang it features suggesting that we have said that we will do what is necessary to protect them ourselves here as well as our forward deployed forces as well as our allies we have security commitments to and so obviously we have 28,500 troops on the korean peninsula and we have got a think north of 50,000 troops in japan so we have significant assets already there and over the long term of the forces in the pacific we are looking at ways to even bolster that but not necessarily in korea and

japan but to specifically when you guys were with us in australia we talked about having access not permanent deployment but having access to certain facilities. obviously we have access and a good relationship in singapore. guam would be the best example of this changing the way down footprint enhancing it in southeast asia. it's got to go. quickly -- >> yes, i was there. >> [inaudible] i don't think i care to elaborate on anything he said. they are becoming a direct threat of the united states and given their pursuit of the nuclear weapons and ballistic missile capabilities that he

sees being a direct threat not within five years but sooner than that and that is of real concern with us and why we work with the chinese and japanese and others to try to press upon the north that they have to cut off this provocative behavior, the destabilizing behavior and think to seriously the dog to the pursuit of nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles thank you.

russian president dmitry medvedev spoke of the world economic forum today in switzerland just days after a suicide bomb attack in a moscow airport killing 35 people and injuring more than 100. he spoke about terrorism, the russian economy and took questions on the current political situation in dayron's nuclear program. this is an hour. >> ladies and gentlemen, please let's observe a moment of silence.

>> mr. president, it's a very special honor particularly given the terrible tragedy in moscow to welcome you here in davos and i should say welcome you back to davos. so many of us remember when you meet your impressive speech which by the way was called modern russia and 2007.

after the economic and political turmoil. it's reasserted itself as a leading global player as a member the g20 and as a so-called brick country and under the leadership russia has successfully overcome the consequences the financial crisis has undertaken significant steps to insure long-term economic stability been actively pursuing and modernization program to diversify the economy, develop small and medium-sized enterprises and investing in human capital. science and technology and also

advancing important social secretary reforms in housing, health care and education. since your election, mr. president, you have and the innovation revolution in your country. major investments have been made although many in the room to develop a research that will become koschel's silicon valley. this initiative you champion personally we create pathways to bring technologies and industry, lounge high tech and facilitate the growth of regional innovation ecosystems.

mr. president, the accelerating russia further integration into the global business and to the economic community's you may have major revolutions in russia's foreign policy. with st progress made in particular relations the rapprochement which the u.s. has delivered a number of successful outcomes including the establishment of a s.t.a.r.t. treaty on the control of nuclear weapons. we are eager to hear from you. there is a new reality in the new plans for addressing the biggest challenges and risks,

terrorism being foremost among them. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the president of the russian federation, dmitry medvedev. [applause] >> these and gentlemen, indeed, the day before yesterday in moscow at the report the terrorist act was committed that took lives, dozens of innocent people citizens of the country

fell victim to terrorist acts, citizen of russia, united kingdom, tajikistan, ukraine, germany, austria, kurdistan, uzbeckistan. more than 100 persons were injured and are now in hospitals. the tragedy shook the entire russian society, although our country was subjected to serious tests. that act caused indignation throughout the civilized world. i received numerous messages, telegrams, telephone calls from the leaders of the foreign mistakes and international organizations expressing their condolences and solidarity. i am grateful for the

condolences i just heard from you and from other participants in the form. to get their we mourn the loss of life. the pain from the loss of human life will stay in our hearts, but what happens helps find protection against international terror and this needs to be of utmost importance. those who committed the act against the citizens expected that their act would bring russia to its knees and force us to be defensive, the expected

and helped the president of russia will not come here and other things of course. this is the criteria used for the time and place for committing that act of terrorism but they must calculate russia is aware of its place in the world, russia is aware of its responsibility and its responsibility to the world. this is the reason why this day i am speaking from this. it is the most important thing the value of human life. it puts upon any rights and

freedoms no matter ideological rationale it generates fewer, it is an obstacle through efforts to improve our world. the situation is dramatic and that the terrorist acts in mccardle way distract and such acts often force us to take very tough decisions. the act so radically change the way of thinking, not those who fall victim but think of everyone living on the planet. unfortunately, no state in the world to terrorism. the reality is such the terrorists to lack for the first

time it happens and at anyplace in the world. no one is immune to that today. >> there are no universal recipes to combat evil, but one thing to be said in a definitive way. our success is very much in our solidarity action particularly in the period while globalization has made the world most interdependent and was some time ago and build upon our efforts in our joint struggle against terrorism to influence at least the social and economic roots of terrorism, probably come on unplumbed, illiteracy

and we have to ensure that development is self and just and fair let me thank you we were conducted during the time many turn to speak of the end of the financial crisis but at the same time it isn't all that simple. the period for the development has resulted in people becoming euphoric. we have proven only one of the crisis and haven't found growth and economic development therefore is bound to be slower than we would like it to be.

at the same time, we have learned serious lessons not only from the economic experience, the technology is developed with compared with what it was like 100 years ago but one natural disaster or technological mistake would be brought to environmental catastrophe and cut from each other as in previous centuries. the election in icelandic, major oil, in russia last year catastrophic technical barriers for the world all of these make us think once again about the

human power on earth. i believe that further proposed nation would be dangerous and we would have to complete long-lasting climate talks although that must be done by all means. also the establishment over the common long-term system for the environment and the common system for the early warning of emergencies. russia has advanced that initiative and we all about our partners will agree that this question is long overdue. today many people changing of the world for the better. the practical policy and would be standards states for the

business, voltmann and relations between the countries. speaking of security, russia some time ago expressed any specific proposal for the treaty on european security and i believe such topics can be discussed every where there would be useful in putting the economic forum. today they actually the settlements leaving behind ever more the technological development. at the same time, some politicians, some people continue to lead by fountains of cold war and are carried away by primitive conditions. during this particular time, almost 1 billion people are using social networks for the

first time in the history of mankind people are communicating with each other directly been located on various continents and this is mind boggling in the. they were becoming increasingly flat and borders and barriers and they are united by a single idea and no government can claim to have a full degree of influence on such communities perhaps that is for the better. business also faces similar factors but there is a dimension to the process. sometimes they serve as an important instrument for

instruments who fuel ethnic and religious hatred and serve as an instrument for traffickers and drugs and for terrorists. these problems are getting worse at the same time the general interconnection should be a major boost for economic growth and it tends to cut the ties for example the frito of internet and would result. russia will not support initiatives that call into question the internet. of course it is based on the requirements of more law and