and expertise that the intelligence function in each of the different member states. there are better procedures for information handling information sharing. there is quite a way to go in that as seem drawn attention to pay we did make some progress. >> is a member of the nato parliamentary assembly, i had to resist quite strongly and other british members at the demand by senator parliamentarian in the nato states to actually insist that all intelligence should be shared equally among nato members. this particularly came from countries like belgium. i. end quote others were quite robust to say you must be joking. there is a dilemma here. when i served in nato, we recognize that anything classified on it took half an hour for the russian.

so there is huge leakage. it's a big problem. i just raised the matter. i am just raising that for the committee to understand the real dilemma when someone has made a secret comment that's the last bloody thing it is. sorry for the use of the language that i've seen a bridge so many times. he met quite already. soldier talk no doubt. there is attention and there are more and are members to consider. what i want to assure you both if everybody recognizes the problems not least because of the terrorism members are facing in western europe and a problem is recognizing they have this initiative to try and position. >> one soldier to another.

the office is going to spin on just the one question. they communicate states responding to nato. it's adopted a strategy and actionable implementation plan. would you be prepared to share in some broad brush strokes what they are and potentially what our role in that may be. >> as far as hybrid is concerned, and i think nato in the individual allies will understand the activity that is designed to introduce uncertainty and ambiguity below the article side threshold is becoming a real issue for the allies. the lessons of ukraine have been unlikely that the next use of hybrid tactics will be the same as the pack acts we saw in ukraine. it is important to develop and

the alliance and agility of response to that to be able to respond next time we see these kind of tactics. the strategy of country hybrid workfare at the end of last year, there is an implementation plan. it is now being agreed and there was a joint declaration at the warsaw summit between the nato secretary-general and president of the european council, president of the commission in c. and getting nato out of the e.u. where there is a role because of the funds of which hybrid workfare can take in getting nato and e.u. to work much more closely on a coordinated approach between the two different institutions. dealing with prevention and protection and information sharing of hybrid workfare cooperated not the response and

communications and better resilience and hardening targets. those institutions of our state states that are most likely than hybrid workfare. >> what is the next conflict in europe >> i missed the first part. >> what is your assessment of the next region a potential conflict within europe. enough well, i think one of the successes of the later summit if they did not ask lucidly favored -- focus on the eastern border, where significant reassurance was required and met by the deployment of enhanced forward presence as we've

discussed. but we also looked in an entire system is devoted that some of the pressures on nato further south. there are rising tensions in at least two parts. one of the black sea region by the militarization of crimea is causing particular concern in romania, bulgaria. countries that are not that far away and nursing increase neglect dvd in the black sea area and of course in the mediterranean south, where we see enhanced russian activity of the coast of syria, but we also need the smuggling of arms from syria along the libyan supply and the french along that coast, very much closer to the nato order. so there are these areas attached. i don't think it would be wise

of me to start speculating to break out, but there are these pressures and the alliance recognizes. >> he wants to come and. >> mostly you referred to the policies. -- what their effectiveness is and their structure that there's no meeting. the surveillance and reconnaissance. i just came to get your steps are your ideas of how you can improve it. crimea is a prime example to many of us feel the criteria, the priorities again come to see

how they could be war fighters. >> admits to be more fact. the alliance of the members of nato failed to predict and indeed fail to predict the intensity of the urgent need for brescia in the eastern ukraine. these were predicted accurately. so that wasn't there. the response was a little fragmented out of style a wake-up call for the alliance. not to be an intelligent, but getting the alliance to look hard again at itself and reverse the decline in defense spending at it to the commitment that the whale summit, which led on to warsaw. mr. watkins may be able to have her more specifically. >> after with the secretary of state said earlier, one of the

things we have been arguing for since crimea, since ukraine in 2014 is that nato needs to be calm more adaptable, more flexible. and needs to be better able to anticipate and respond to desert of event that affects not only just the intelligence arrangement, but also more broadly so there has been extensive work over the last year or so on it proving nato's intelligent arrangement in the initiative that the defense secretary mentioned. it is an area fraught with difficulties for regions that have very eloquently already. we are pushing ahead for this and we are very determined to make it better. >> can i ask the vice-chief was specific assessment arrangement do you have within the military, versus the u.k. military and do

you feel in the light of the fact that it was the surprise would have been in ukraine crimea that changes are necessary has such changes been made? >> i'll take us back to the first question about how as you yourself said we had drawn down on russian expertise and russian intelligence specialists in the intervening years. that is what has been addressing for some time. the comments the secretary of state made earlier about developing both in the policy area, but also the intelligent area are absolutely valid and are an area of quite considerable investment. i would also highlight the fact that nato collected leave is absolutely addressing the challenge in this skit back to the serious question on how we can best leverage that.

on the more recent question of the effectiveness of our isr and how we can leverage the nearly 29 patients more effectively. there is precedent they are and that we have for many years now committed our century aircraft nato. they have been tasked by nato essentially with those of other nations to the object is set by nato and even today free a stark white tight in our capability, for many across the alliance to develop a pen that's reducing the opportunities for collaboration or growth. i do not

>> it was emphasized strongly in the growth from warsaw. i was preparing for any military confrontation in north korea and south china sea. >> well, there is no direct nato road in korea. obviously, we can then any ongoing nuclear activity by the people's republic of korea and they continue to emphasize the committee is in violation of the security council resolution and we want north korea to put a stop to these provocations and start re-engaging constructively with the international community and we work as the united kingdom, within the united nations to maintain that pressure. we were instrumental in drafting the latest resolution 2270 and

that you will see contains some of the toughest measures yet restrict being the transfer of technology and doing more to impede north korea suffers to develop a deployable nuclear weapon. it was also the statement by the european union on the 27th of june, which the u.k. supported that, too, condemned the missile test. so those are the foreign weeper enhanced to bear on what happened in north korea. >> you think there'd be any point in the future for north korea could see a direct challenge? >> certainly its development of nuclear weapons is a very direct challenge and yes another reason by parliament was right yesterday to endorse the replacement for vanguard does. too many nuclear weapons out

there in north korea is a very good example of a red state developing his weapons of them continue to protect ourselves. >> thank you are a much indeed. simply stated the comments yesterday were highly given the opportunity to go on what is always going to be a very substantial margin. i look at the summit communiqué security threat in the black sea region. what would you say the threats that caused nato security in the black sea region? >> first, can i welcome what she said about yesterday's vote. it is debating info we promised

before christmas. you know i've been pressing for it for some time and it's like a delayed because of the referendum. the majority achieved last night was really have enormous significance, a much bigger majority in the previous vote and sends a very strong signal to our allies around the world. i am sure

>> should be debated.voted on w. advises subject to qualifications as we set up by the british national interest and it isn't possible to consult paltry in town or whether some humanitarian catastrophe which

has to be dealt with very, very quickly. >> people will vote in favor in iraq and the particular case but equally as possible on other occasions parliament will vote against the doing something which will turn up the right thing to do. you yourself perhaps would argue the case that's the case in syria in 2014. i quite accept your definition and who would want to to become a matter for the courts but surely it's a question of crafting such a way that allows the executive to act the way they wish to act with the authority of parliament by a particular vote. >> i'm always ready to keep thinking but in general terms i prefer conventions that evolved out of in the legalistic approach of trying to define in subparagraph what constitutes a particular mission.

i think does leach into difficult and i'm afraid does involve the courts. parliament, i think of the wrong decision in the first syria voter i think of a number of people his boat into chilcot debate is to believe parliament did the right decision back then although it may have been misled about the information about the intelligence about wmd. i think probably wrong to start off by saying parliament can't or shouldn't debate and decide these matters. >> thank you very much. john. >> yes, before we go to the chilcot can erase the announcement of a the 17th of july -- appointed by the prime minister to conduct a review into use of reserves in the army. that raises the question that

with the independent research commission in 2011 and the reserves white paper and 2013, why a new review necessary because we've made considerable progress in recruiting reserves. a lot of focus on that through advertising and encouraging the regular units to team up with the reserve units in their area and so on. but i think it is right to look more broadly as the reserve numbers have increased particularly into army to look again at the possibilities that open up to how reserves can be used in future. and also whether the boundary between regulars and reserves is the right one. whether it is too artificial, for example, whether there might be ways at different stages, peoples career of encouraging more flexibility and movement.

i noticed that when significant numbers of regulars leaving the armed forces who want to be reservists. we may a people who want to move from the reserves to the regulars. is the boundary between the 22 formalized? that's one of the things that we haven't finalized, we haven't finalized the reference for mr. françoise but that is a lease one area alongside we should use reserves that i think would be useful to have another look at. >> any idea when that is expected to report? >> not. i think this was only announced a couple of days ago. in terms of reference for mr. françoise and i for mr. françoise at the camp by the way think of anybody better to do this, former armed forces minister. he himself i think serve as a reservist and he is ideally suited to carry this out. >> will we still than half a

minister for the reserves in the structure speak was we will have a minister who deals with these personal issues including the reserves. the minister will be dealing, the new minister will be dealing -- sorry. mr. lancaster will be dealing with armed personnel issues, that includes regular service but it also would include veterans and reserves. so he will be able to look at all these issues together. >> is of this review just look at those issues you just described going forward, or is it reviewing whether, in fact, the number of reserves coming forward has frankly been inadequate to replace the number of those who have been going out over the regular forces? >> i wouldn't a great it has been inadequate. we have some time yet to meet the target that was fixed.

the numbers coming in the last two years have gone up and up, and i would like to pay tribute to the former minister of the reserves who did huge amount to drive up recruitment and to focus in this particular area. no, i want mr. françoise to look forward now to how we can find more opportunities to deploy reserves and as i say, to look at making the boundary between a regular and a reservist more flexible. but i'm not yet actually finalized history of reference so your input at this stage is a very welcomed. >> on that very specific point about terms of reference, as long as the issue, will one of the issues under the report be about women coming in and out, what are the issues we will see women leave the service? it's also possible to return and that instant affecting the

number of female senior officers. will also be part of the inquiry? >> that's exactly. exactly that. we needed better entrance in recruiting women into the reserves and we need to understand women's priorities will change at different points in their career and why we are losing too many people that we would like to retain. can we make it easier, for example, for them to come back again after a short break without losing some of the damage they might have had by staying in all a long? and candid look again at the liabilities -- can we -- could those be more flexible, different stages of somebody's life. that's exactly the kind of area i think we would be willing to look at. >> in the remaining time which is just over half an hour, we would like to focus now on the

chilcot report and lessons from it. john, if you would like to start with questions. >> what measures if any would you say the m.o.d. is setting to absorb the lessons and analysis of the chilcot report? >> first of all we welcomed the report. it tells a very important story about our recent history of the period, a military campaign where we could clearly have done better. it concludes that we did not achieve our strategic objective, however well the troops did fight. clearly we could have done better and we need to learn from that. and establish why we didn't do better at the time. so we are looking at everything chilcot has said about the

ministry itself, but some of our own decision-making processes, the way in which advice is tendered both to ministers and from military commanders to very senior ministers. we are looking again at the armed forces as how we can improve the structures there and the ability of proper, the ability to ensure proper challenge within the armed forces to avoid the dangers of groupthink. and, of course, we'll have another look at our equipment processes, some of which were improved for the afghanistan campaign but there may again be for the lessons in terms of getting the equipment that is needed for particular campaigns to the front more quickly. so there is an awful lot there that we need to pick up on, and i'm quite sure as i said when i spoke in the debate -- last

week? thursday. the debate on thursday, we are not at all complacent about this. we believe that ministry has improved since those days but i suspect we have a lot more to do. >> will debate any sort of dedicated unit within the ministry that will claw through this huge font of the cure in order to extrapolate the lessons and make recommendations? >> the short answer to that is yes. i have set out the team did exactly that, to go right through the report and to make sure that proper lessons are learned and they are hard at work doing that at the moment. >> would've a chance of its findings be made public, even if slightly redacted form of? >> we can report on how we get on, you know, in the findings. and more importantly how we're implementing the changes that you would like us are expect to

see. i'm happy to look about. >> can you tell us who is in charge of unit? >> can adjust perhaps add one thing to your earlier question? has to be a government response to the chilcot report in due course, and it may be that form, summarizes some of our initial work in how our findings are going to be implemented. >> i just asked that question but that was very helpful. can you tell us who's in charge of the unit that is going to be trawling through the m.o.d.? >> i'm in overall charge of everything. >> i appreciate that but even given your superhuman capacity for work might not extend to how many million words, such as what was your able to tell us who the officials are going to? >> sure. people describe the structure of the team for your. >> basically set up a teen. we have a directorate and the minister of defense, which has

been dealing with inquiries, investigation and so on for many years. we have set up a team within a directorate, some of whose members are actually sitting behind us and they are doing just what the defensive secretary sedney they are trawling through all 2.6 million words. one of the points i think i should make about the report is aactually noticed it doesn't contain a source of simple table of recommendations and conclusions. the findings come to conclusions, the lessons are actually spread not just across the whole report, not just an executive summary but deep and to some of the other rather thick volumes so they're going through it every single volume line by line to pull out all that information. >> maybe they felt they didn't have enough time to prepare a summary. at can you just tell me who is in charge of this team, this

unit? >> fifteen disorder led by doctor -- doctor hutton and he is sitting behind us. >> was the decision to deploy and largest go forth, potential combat operations was taken without collective ministerial consideration of the decision and its implications. so if it's not too early to ask, how are the m.o.d. and the government crisis management organizations now better prepared to provide advice assessment, strategic auctions and appraisal of the consequences of potential conflict? in other words, assuming it's not going to be for government next time, how is it going to work a? >> it's already not so for government because in 2010 event partnership established a

national security council, which meets every week in june. due to meet this afternoon. it meets every week and comprises in a not the most senior ministers in the government but that's other there is agencies, the chief of the defense staff, the permanent secretary at the foreign office and all those you would expect, and prepares briefing material is prepared by the national security secretariat for all those who attended that council. so there is no danger of a decision like that of that magnitude ever again being taken on a, by handful of people in the prime minister's study. >> so would you say that this new machinery would be adequate in relation to post-conflict planning and delivery seeing one of the main findings of chilcot

is the hopeless inadequacy of preparing for what would take place after the military base, the initial military phase have been successful? >> international development is a member of the national security council, and one of the lessons of the chilcot which we've already -- stabilization plan has to be in the overall plan right from the outset. we have a cross government a stabilization unit. we see officials from the unit participating out in our exercises and in our training. i think that is one lesson that has been learned from the experience of iraq, that this has to be absolutely certain. that is something we are thinking hard about in respect to libya and syria and, indeed, back in iraq itself.

>> you anticipate the next question. if this machinery is -- purpose for new machinery why did things go wrong in libya? why was there apparently insufficient appreciation that removing that dictator in that country would lead to the same sort of -- removing the previous dictator in iraq the? >> let's be clear that the initial action which was one authorized by the international community and was at the request of the arab league and initial action was to be successful in preventing the massacre that would otherwise have taken pla place. the view at the time, you'll appreciate, i wasn't there at the time but if you at the time was that thereafter we needed to respect the position of the new political authorities in libya who had little appetite for

foreign assistance. they didn't require it. they didn't request it. and i think that led the west to overestimate their capacity for establishing the order that was required and, of course, as you now know they essentially disintegrated into different factions by the middle of 2014. >> is it not the case that the military advice that was given to the national security council i know we are not doing inquiry to libya at the moment, but it was not being asked -- in the strategic interest to remove the dictator and that that was rather rushed aside by prime minister at the time. and what this leads to end it

will surprise you because you have heard from this committee before is the question of whether or not the military representation needs strengthening when decisions of this sort being made so that they purely strategic considerations of whether it was sensible to remove an unpleasant dictator without regard to the chaos that may follow can be more strongly put forward. and that's why, although it does seem a great step forward to having the national security council, this committee has consistently suggested that the chiefs of staff should have an input into its consideration, just as the chief of defense does. >> chiefs of staff have been put through the chief of the defense staff who not only attends national security council but tens of the meeting of officials that preceded in the days

leading up to the national security council. so he will always be careful to ensure that he does have the advice of the chiefs of staff. i can't comment on what happened on the particular, leading up to the libyan operation. want i can give is that sitting alongside the chief of defense staff in the years that i've been on the national security council, i don't think of ever attended a meeting where his advice has been -- what was your phrase? brushed aside? absolutely no. >> something along the lines of you do the fighting and we will do the planning or something of that sort. we will leave it at that for the moment. thank you. i fully appreciate that you were not involved at that time. >> before asked the question, i want the opportunity to wish you well in washington and may be surprised a number of people in the chamber are asking the

question -- nuclear deterrent, that we didn't have them yesterday. me because of the to keep to yourself when you're in washington. looking at your face i'm sure you have plenty on your plate. can i just as the question on chilcot, and the chilcot report just as the government was not -- post-conflict planning and they did not take response accordingly. also the lack of systematic options. a doctrine -- [inaudible] >> i'm not quite clear about your first point as i understood

some of the speeches and the debate from scottish representatives. they would've been happy to morally contracted out on nuclear defense to the united states, which is something, i simply comfortably read the debate again but that is simply i simply couldn't understand why we would want to cower under someone else's nuclear umbrella when we had the power to defend ourselves come at the deterrent already to. that perhaps i will read the debate again. [inaudible] >> let me turn to the question you've asked a yes, we have stabilization unit in that cross government machinery not. in a way that said it wasn't true back in the early 2000. i've already told you that i visited exercises, large-scale exercises such as griffin strike

i think it was with the french to validate the combined expeditionary force. when i was in the plenary i saw the stabilization unit representatives already sitting there working with the french on the implications for post-conflict and what would need to be done in this exercise to help to stabilize security in areas once the fighting had started. but mr. watkins may be able to add to that. >> i would say planning for post-conflict situations and stabilization is not in a much more systematic basis that it was within and clearly the stabilization unit is part of it. but because more broadly than that. we have produced and refreshed our doctrine on this. we have to think of joint doctrine publication 340 on stabilization which is a very good read. i recommend it to you but the point of that document is also

was produced by ministry of defence is actually a cost of doctrine at it reflects the lessons and expenses medal at the ministry of defence but the foreign office, dfid and soldier if anything i would add to that is we must be quite careful about imagining that there's some sort of set of lessons for a precise set a playbook that you can learn and apply in every circumstance. because each circumstance is different. afghanistan was different from a right to libya was different from those do, and so what we have sought to draw out is a generic lessons. the first generic lesson which might seem a little bit glib is just about the importance of planning, planning itself as a real benefit. event there are other lessons about the importance of cross

government coordination, about coordination with the local authorities, involvement of local people and so when. all of which are reflected in documents such as the ones i mentioned. >> can i just jump in on the back of the comments that we have collectively learned a great deal, and we've absolutely accepted there is no generic solution or that we do recognize this is a balance between security, governance and development and getting that right. and will the second point i would make is that this is not just the getting out own national ducks in order. the stabilization community is that in a much more mature place ambition understood place now internationally man it was within.

and the third component of this is engagement with ngos which i think is a deeper one with those ngos who are prepared to work with government. i was with a large group yesterday of ngos taking standings on specific security issues. i think a number of areas we hope improved collection. spent i appreciate there is no one solution in every same situation but does it include things like if it's not -- [inaudible] >> we need to be careful about

groupthink so that when you have the planning process not just stabilization but for other things, it is about challenging, it is about introducing alternative viewpoints to ensure that the main street is not the only one being heard. >> one of the key findings in chilcot was validation of the materials derived by as much as to the joint intelligence committee concerned alleged wmd. tell us, are you confident this couldn't happen again? if so, why? and also what methodism's will not ensure that defensive systems -- are properly integrated into the work speak with the jic existed before a chilcot. i think it's important to remind ourselves of that. but it has not been

significantly enhanced since the iraq campaign. and there is more independence built into it assessment. we are regularly, senior ministers, briefed on its analysis of affairs countries and issues that are on the nsc. i think it also is more widely based not. it has more access to other forms of reporting. though i can't see a situation where the advice that we can't of the intelligence that we asked to act on ever limited to such a small number of sources as appears to have been the case in the intelligence. for example, on wmd.

>> could you expand on what, this seems be the slightest sort of crazy dichotomy of the moment today of a general public opinion, a lack of willingness to engage in operations and that seems to be -- an ever-increasing dangerous world that we live in. can you confirm to the committee that there's absolutely no reference whatsoever to do what is required to protect this nation and that the people we are asking to do that have everything that they require and that, that includes the ability to protect themselves were ever we've asked them to deploy? >> serving in terms of government. let me reassure you, we will deploy what we need to deploy to keep our citizens safe. you will have seen the retiring

chief defense staff spend it in the telegraph on saturday where he picks up on exactly this point that we do need to learn the right is from chilcot, that there may be situations where we intervened in the wrong way but equally we need to avoid the position where we don't intervene again. and that means went to work harder i think to explaining the need for intervention and to get over to the public that many of the issues we face, although these areas may seem far away from our shores, can become endless they are tackled very direct threats. that extent i think whether it is peacekeeping operations done in somalia or south sudan to our continuing presence in afghanistan where you have a transnational terrorist groups

that i a foreign until the chicn bring care to our own streets. so i think as politicians, all of us, yourself included, we have to continue to show to our constituents that there is a very direct national interest in dealing with these issues that are much further back in helping to stabilize fragile states, aiding states that are affected by insurgency, improving the training of their soldiering. and then professionalizing, reforming their defense ministries and helping to eradicate corruption. all these things are part and parcel further downstream, or is it upstream? for the upstream, in helping to keep our country safe. >> at the moment with the politicals in a situation we are in, you can confirm between

itself, the traffic of the service chiefs, the decision they can start at the top of government, there's absolutely -- to keep us safe from sort of things we've seen in nice and elsewhere across the globe at this time? >> not. to give you examples, i authorize deployment of another 250 troops to iraq, in addition to the troops we already have serving their to do for the training in counter id, deployment of engineers and medics and long forced protection for the base to which they're going to be headquartered. that is an additional contribution to the fight against daesh. we have increased our commitme commitment, our deployments in afghanistan by around 10% of we will be doing that over the summer. so there is no -- and with declared to our friends in

europe that we can assist in the fight against terrorism on the continent of europe, we are ready to do so. offering to share intelligence, to deploy forensics assistance and any other help that our allies require. we have repeated that offer to the french government in light of the tragedy at nice and the prime minister will be reemphasizing debt when she meets the french president very shortly. >> thank you. the unloading of it had capability gaps in relation to -- anthony pettis in the impact in operations. john chilcot conclude many gaps in such capabilities should always be clearly communicated to ministers. this resulted in a ministers giving less than accurate

answers to parliament question. how do you ensure that practice does not persist today? and i must say, in my experience at this place, there is clearly no conscious decision of anybody to come and say the wrong thing to a select committee or to the house of parliament our westminster hall, whatever that may be. but there have been cases where we've seen over the last 12 months whether it be the inquiry or how we look after our people going through the process where ministers have said things that have been patently not correct. bears no accusation of misleading or anything there but how do we ensure that ministers who come and represent these facts to the public, are actually saying the right thing? >> ministers should be as great as they can be when they appear in front of committees and i'm

sorry to hear the specific allegations you are making. and i'll have a look at that. i'm not aware of that ministers giving this committee any incorrect facts. is something you want to write about and i'm happy to do so. i think your question really relates to is there, would now be examples of where people down the chain of command had requested capability or equipment, and it simply wasn't being supplied and perhaps they felt inhibited about challenging that? that is a question i've asked. i came right at the tail end of the afghanistan operation with a lot of equipment was being brought back. but what i've asked it of people who serve their, i'm pretty good at sorting towards the end of the campaign the military can't what they thought they needed, and there were not any restrictions of the capabilities of equipment that was provided

to it's probably worth emphasizing that come at you will know this better than anybody, that no force set up with the perfect equipment in each case to each campaign to be slightly different and may require equipment to be slightly resent. that's why we have what's called the operational requirement. it to reset the equipment capabilities and relatively short notice to get the money out of the treasure and to be able to move quite quickly to upgrade the reset what was originally planned. >> i don't think anybody is suggesting there's been any intentional misleading of this committee. what we want to explore more is whether or not ministers would not if they were -- would know if there were gaps into the boat at the outset before, for example, a force was deployed to. do you have the internal

machinery accepting the fact obviously that these are specific capability gaps that you would not under the circumstances wish to make public. but do you have the internal machinery that would ensure that you as sick of state for defense would be told at the outset before an operation begins we've got deficiencies in a particular area speaker yes, i'm really confident about that. i'm confident about the because revenue deputy chief of defense staff military capability, is tasked with ensuring that is a coherent equipment support program right across defense. he is responsible not just republican support but for capability as a whole. and i am pretty confident that the current holder of that office would come and tell me if

there was some urgent capability that was not being provided in one of the theaters where our people are at risk at the moment in either afghanistan or iraq. >> let's take perhaps an example going back to where we were in the first part of our discussions today. namely, nato's very high readiness joint task force. so this is a body that would be intended to be put into the field, as the name implies, on very short notice in the event of some hostile or aggressive move to one of our nato allies. are you satisfied and possibly i could bring device achieved in at this point, are you satisfied that if that particular balloon went out and the joint task

force was prepared for rapid deployment because of some emergency that had developed in, say the baltic states, are you happy that within the machine there would be people who would speak truth to power and inform their superiors what gaps there might be in the readiness of the force to do what is tasked to do in an emergency? >> the short answer to that is yes. i am satisfied that i would be informed of any concerns about that. the overall requirement, i think it's important to emphasize is defined by nato. so the decision to activate it is taken by the north atlantic council, committee control, responsibilities lie within

nato. and the kind of certification, if you can put it like that, that the force is ready to deploy, is really a matter for nato. we would -- i'm pretty confident i would if there were any gaps. >> the purpose of the gta it is actually to deploy quickly to deter, and not necessarily to respond. give victory a period of escalating tension over to deescalate that tension. and its capabilities are absolutely designed to bring with it a combat capability that is meaningful, that can pack a punch at that can defend itself. if we were in the game, and let's not be theater specific, if we were in the game of

responding to a threat, then we have the ability to tailor the force elements that we would put into that to the nature of the environment that they might find themselves. we would do so as the secretary of state said with nato to ensure that our collective agency was enhanced. >> are you actually satisfied that if you are any gaps in these structures and in these formations, capabilities that you know about? >> so we have selected the capabilities we are committing to it on the basis of defensive deterrence and were absolutely countable that the force element can pack a punch and can defend itself. if the threat manifests itself in a specific way, if this was about response, then we be looking to bolster that capability not financially and with allies. >> if there was any deficiencies or shortfall, would it be something that you are satisfied

you already had measures in place to remedy? >> as you know there's a pretty comprehensive and robust program or capability has been under way. that's absolutely being delivered with a dude to the likely threats that forced mike face. that does include competitors. so i can give you that assures. >> excellent, thank you very much. >> according to chilcot and imaging stimulus effective -- service personnel and their families. especially in relation to support to those who were mobilize independently or individually. i'm sure you are duty of care something as well of the conference agenda. so what has actually changed in order to ensure that it would be

ready to support both regular and reservists, and the families probably from the outset of any future conflict? >> to support to service personnel i think has improved since iraq. we now have a covenant to make sure that commits us to ensure members of the armed forces are not disadvantaged compared to other citizens when they go out on military service, and that in some cases they get special consideration, especially those who have been either injured in the course of their duty or indeed buried during the course of their duty. all of that is improved i think and measurable sense the initial campaign in iraq. and i think there is better support whether our injuries or deaths in the service but there is better support for the families that existed before.

of visiting officers t have alws appointed to support the families from anybody who is killed in action and to act as a focus for their concerns. those visiting officers are trained, supported by the defense academy of the armed forces chaplains center. there are a number of other improvements, especially in the availability of mental health services. there is a bit of clinical knowledge and policies surrounding mild traumatic brain injury, for example. there's a reserves of mental health program that didn't exist before. there is more welfare support in addition and proper points of contact between the service, welfare staffs. and some other wounded personnel who have returned home. so i think we have learned a lot from these campaigns and continue to improve service the village of the service available

to personnel and to think that was borne out over laughter stages of camping in afghanistan. >> we've got just one more topic today. and that is something on which the committee has been taking a special interest with its subcommittee chaired by johnny mercer who would not ask the last question. >> thank you, jerry. but essentially about this process that is going on at the moment. before that, the relations which isn't about ministry government, the military covenant, if it works, this study out today, 70% people think it works enforcement of the moment and that, over half haven't even heard of it. i just think these things are fantastic but we need to kind of change how we look at this stuff, not what we are putting into the system which is lots and lots of good things that

actually how the bloke seat. how they can access this care. and i think once we change the way we look at these things that's when we will get a real difference in how we look after people who are going through, who may fall upon hard times when events. anyway that's for another day. the and was chasing, i don't particularly like that expression because they will do what they do but in the uk but is an integral in the wake of iraq. we have an investigation allegations of unlawful killing and ill-treatment by uk armed forces and the right. what needs to be done cut and in particular to ensure reasonable judicial treatments of service personnel who often had to make very hard and extraordinarily demanding circumstances. i know on this particular issue you have worked extraordinarily hard to try and expedient this process but the facts remain that we are still, the inquiry

was set up by this commission because we are told sort of one thing by the minister that no soldier will hear from anyone other than an mad individual first look after them and get with hundreds of people get in touch as saying these teams are sort turning up the bay, threatening to arrest people, going to old girlfriends houses in 2009-2010. the oppressio impression is thit gotten completely out of control of what is a government investigation. it touches on a previous point of how we are sort of dull things bide ministers and to stop this sort of personal campaign but we've been receive an awful lot of evidence that points in the other way and place of an difficult decision were meant to represent that. so what is being done to maintain that proportionately, ultimately that fairness to our servicemen and women speakers first let me respond to your point on the covenant that i

will read the report the covenant is to think you are right, we can make sure it is working in practice and that more people are aware of it. the obligations under the covenant fall not just to the ministry but to all those who signed a. it's important to be that branches of government, rather local councils or gp clinics or health trusts or indeed the big companies, that they do a bide by it and not just simply, get credit for signing it but that it is implemented on the ground. we will continue to look at that implementation in a stage by stage and we do need to make sure more people are aware of it. i think it's important to step back a little bit. we are obliged under the rule of the south as well as under the rule of part of as well as under international rule to examine any allegations that are made

against members of the armed forces. that's illegal obligation to recast into. we have to do. if we don't do it then we would expect the international the mughal court to get more involved in investigating allegations that are made against members of our armed forces. and in successive rulings, our own judges have made it clear that it will become more and more lengthy if we don't demonstrate that these allegations are being properly looked at. to my mind what is really important is to separate out the serious allegations that is clearly being concocted, and make sure the serious allegations have resources, that those things are investigated properly and do we know exactly what happened.

so far as service personnel are concerned, we provide training to assist them in what is required of international humanitarian law in the first place and then, of course, through a duty we offer further assistance when they are subject to specific allegations. no amount of training of cores can predict, protect the soldier against a false allegation. it's still, unfortunately, have to look at to to see whether there's any substance to it. what i think is important as we devote the right resource to those to be able to deal with allegations that are manifestly false and don't have any prospect of being stood up in accord. that we deal with those as quickly as possible so that the team can start to focus on the more serious allegations. >> can i ask you two questions? firstly, why is france for the

united states not having this particular problem? and secondly, with, you do, nobody misses the point that we have to investigate allegations. of course, we do. we have to uphold the standards of the we set up to do we work bloody hard to achieve. we need to do that but i find it hard to accept that the people who should bear the brunt are also servicemen and women in terms of how long it takes to investigate claims come in terms of the practices adopted by the ihat team, and the trick is the are many soldiers and officers up and down the plant -- the truth is -- commanding officers. if you're totally betrayed by this process. they don't misunderstand the point that we must investigate allegations. does that not suggest that something so has gone badly wrong?

>> well, the fourth of because you are concerned, the united states doesn't recognize international criminal courts and they are in a different position, and france has a reservation under the application at the convention of human rights to its forces. we chose in this country not to do that. we have chosen to abide by these international obligations. had we done that it might well have deterred a whole series of these particular, these particular claims. i think it's important that, whether credible allegations that they're probably investigate. i think the army would -- they have to be investigated. and as i said it is important that we clear away those that quite clearly can't be stood up.

at the moment there have not been any court-martials under the ihat procedure i think so far there's only been one summer hearing as the result of the investigations and to a whole series of cases. so it may be that very few of them actually can be substantiated. >> it's fair to say that you and the minister other team as well as prime minister and the attorney general are trying to advance this cause. it seems to be something entirely in are making if we have, you know, france or the united states or any other over alice we are essential asking our men and women at the bottom of the chain to bear the brunt with a situation we seem to guide our selves into. >> we have subscribed to the international criminal court. there are benefits to the country from being members of

the. other countries took a different view as to what they want. >> i think it's actually a complex situation to the are a number of factors that have contributed to this. as the suggested says france was relatively late in signing the convention on human rights and place a reservation which does seem to have deterred this sort of, these sorts of claims in france. i think there's also a factor with the nature of the operations that we were involved with in iraq and in afghanistan. they were counterinsurgency operations. they involve a lot of contact as of those operations do with the populace that provided opportunities for people to make a number of cases that turned out to be false claims. so there's factors like that. there may be something about our

own legal system, and certainly companies have taken opportunities into them as well spent if the suggested is right that only a very small proportion of these allegations are shown to substance, so far, we have -- inquiry as a painful example of that, is there any plan within the ministry to develop proposals that could be put up to government to try to protect our service personnel from what is clearly an organized effort by a small number of legal surface, some of which themselves are under investigation for misconduct, but which has this terrible effect on individuals lives, often after they left the service speak with the are such plans, yesterday there were proposals put forward in the

election last year on which we are working to be able, for example, to better recover costs from this group was law firms that are benefiting from this industry of false allegations. >> will proposals be brought forward? >> we are bringing proposals forward. i hope soon in this area to limit, for example, the time period so that actions can be brought after a certain point. which apply in other litigation to ensure that those who are deployed in future have more immunity from this kind of prosecution. that is a package of proposals that we are continuing to work on. >> one just finally unless john -- one final on the very small but radical suggestion. it's been brought to my attention that as the ministry is quite good at supporting

service personnel, even who have now retired from the armed forces, what charges have been brought. they may feel bewildered and uncertain what to do when simply approached out of the blue and told that they are being subject to investigation. is there any one stop shop in the form of a dedicated number that people who find themselves long after the event told that they may face charges for the past campaign conduct, that they should immediately rain before giving any statements of any sort to anyone who might approach them? and if it is such a number, can it be highlighted on the m.o.d. website and publicized throughout the various service

support charities so that former service personnel in particular who are approached and who are threatened with legal action immediately not to get in contact with advice sources by ringing a particular number of before making any statements whatsoever? >> that's an important point and i think an actual suggestion but i believe there is such a number but i will not go back to diminish and make sure that if there is such a number it is probably publicized amongst veterans who may agitate the approached out of the blue to try and recall something that took place in the years before. a very good suggestion. i will take that back. >> forgive me but that is an understanding within the ministry of defence that this sort of looking after people, helping them when they come to

the situations. this is a fundamental part of operations in combat as. if it's a suggestion that is just come forward, it is extremely basic but, if it had that been done thus far, can you assure the committee there's a real understanding like they have in america and elsewhere that looking after our people is a fundamental part of performance of operations speak was absolutely. have the duty of care to our people and i'm determined to make sure that is demonstrated. >> may i thank all our three witnesses today. we are very grateful to need -- indeed. we are now concluded. border order. >> tune in today for live coverage of the second day of the republican national convention. today's program gets underway at 5:30 p.m. eastern and speakers include house speaker paul ryan, said majority leader mitch mcconnell, new jersey governor chris christie and donald

trump's son, donald trum donald. a focus o focus on economic grod job opportunities for all americans. today is also a state roll call with the convention formally nominates the presumptive candidates for president and vice president. that all gets underway today at 5:30 p.m. eastern with a preview program beginning at 4:00. watch on c-span, listened on the season rooted out and get video on demand at c-span.org. the newest class of republican senators are going to take the stage at tonight's convention. politico writing nearly all republican senators elected in the class of 2014 will take the stage tonight with a message. we are the ones who got harry reid fired. led by senator dan sullivan of alaska. and of a dozen republican freshmen elected two years ago will appear together in a show of unity from the recruits that one of santa for the gop that you. the spokesman added senator

sullivan is expected to speak about how the freshman class fired harry reid. missing from the crew is senator ben sasse of nebraska one of the most vocal critics of the gop standardbearer. the other senate republican elected in 2014 who is not expected to be on the stage is cory gardner of the colorado. a spokesman did not immediately return a request for comment. we need more at politico.com. >> he will have a front-row seat to every minute of the republican-democratic national conventions on c-span.org. watch live streams of the convention proceedings without commentary or commercials. use our video clipping tool to create your own clips on your favorite convention moments and share them on social media. also read twitter feed some delegates and reporters in cleveland and philadelphia. our special convention pages have everything you need to get the most of c-span's gavel to gavel coverage.

go to c-span.org/republican national convention and c-span.org/democratic national convention for updated schedule information to see what's happening during each convention in session. every speech will be available on demand for viewing when you want on your desktop, laptop, tablet and smartphone. our special convention pages at all of c-span.org are a public servant for your cable or satellite provider. if you're a c-span watcher check it out on the web at c-span.org your. >> coming up live today on c-span2, iraq's foreign minister will talk about his country's future and its role in the middle east. the u.s. institute of peace is hosting the discussion live at 1:30 p.m. eastern on c-span2. tonight it is booktv and primetime. beginning at 8 p.m. eastern with office of some recent best selling books.

that's all tonight beginning at 8 p.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> attorney general loretta lynch presented her predecessor eric holder with a national organization of black law enforcement executives leadership award at the organization's annual conference in washington, d.c. eric holder acknowledged the tensions between law enforcement and the minority communities it serves. he called on police to take on the mindless industry driven gun lobby telling officers to speak up.

>> the national organization of black law enforcement executives annual conference and opening plenary session is now in session. we would have presentation of colors by the united states customs and border protection. please stand. ..

♪ ♪

♪ whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight, o'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming? and the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air, gave proof through the night that our flag was still there. oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave o'er the land of the free and the home of the brave? ♪

♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

[applause] >> i would now like to introduce reverend dr. barbara wiggins. >> letters pray.

father, we thank you that we are in this place to honor you. we thank you that we have come together to share, to learn, to spend time with one another, looking at our visions, not just for today, but for the future. as we are here as they collect his body, to learn and to train, we pray for our brothers and sisters in the field. we pray for those in louisiana with what happened on yesterday. we pray not just for our fallen brothers, we pray for those that get hurt and their family who stand by their side and for those who grieve. we pray for every incident that has happened in our country in every city and every state. leopold of people because we have called to justice by action. i ask you to bless each and

every household that is represented and father come amid thank you or they give you based ms to not only see this, not only to write the vision, but to implement. in your name, we pray amen. >> good morning. it is my pleasure now to introduce you to a stalwart supporter of law enforcement general and noble in particular. this morning in greensboro, north carolina, the honorable loretta lynch a nod to earn her degree from harvard law school and shortly after that worked as

a litigator for a law firm before becoming a prosecutor in the u.s. attorney's office in the u.s. district. eventually making news as a senior prosecutor for advert in a police brutality case. under the administration of president l. clinton and barack obama and in 2014 was nominated by president obama to be the u.s. attorney general succeeding the honorable eric holder. after a long delay. i want to emphasize a long delay, in april 2015, she was confirmed and sworn in, thus becoming the first african-american woman to hold a position. on a personal note, i want to introduce her as a long-time friend of mine and a colleague and a mentor, someone who has been supportive, but more

importantly the role i have now as noble national president. the amend unfolding of the last few weeks and months across the country, i knew i had a chance to have somebody on tv with a common voice reassuring things will be okay in a personal note we would converse personally about what is going on and what's transpiring. she's also making sure we are at the table when we need to be there to ensure the voice of noble, which is unique, as you know, but is there all the time and a loud voice where appropriate. it is my pleasure now to introduce to you a friend of noble and they so to anyone who dares commit a crime in the united states of america, the honorable loretta lynch. [applause] >> good morning. please be seated, everyone.

good morning. wait a minute, this is noble. good morning. >> good morning. >> every go. that is the noble i know. that is the noble ideal. let me thank my friend gregory for that warm introduction, for that kind introduction, but also support over the last several months, but even before that, for support and friendship exemplifies the best of noble, dedication to duty, love of community and he lives the motto of the organization. you could not have had a finer man to lead you for the past year. he has set the bar very high for those who will come after him. i know that this organization being noble, there are those who see the example waiting to go even further. then express my attitude to dwayne crawford, friend and colleague for so many years. in the trenches on the issues

that now everyone is talking about, that has really been at the heart of noble for so, so long. but it is such a pleasure for me to be her this morning. it is always a pleasure to be among friends. i do speak a foreign lot of groups and while i certainly won't say that it isn't perfectly lovely to testify before congress, and it is always good to be among friends. in particulaparticula r, friend to know that the goal everyone has and this wonderful professional buyers, this wonderful profession of law enforcement is not just public safety, not just national security, but the most important basic goal of everyone who takes an oath to defend the right of everyone who calls this great country home, every single person. that has been your motto in your mantra for years. of course we know the last few weeks have been very difficult. they have been painful.

they have been a painful reminder of how it difficult and important the work still is that noble is doing. all of us in law enforcement are seeking to do. as we were still reeling what the law says from dallas, from minnesota, from baton rouge, just yesterday we were hit again with more tragedy, more guardians fallen and that roush, louisiana. american flags again at half mast. families again morning those loved ones. send list violence again intruding into the public discourse. as he tried and say, these incidents occur and it seems that it pulls us back into a period when we are so far apart. you know, more than on just different sides of the highway or different sides of the tracks. sometimes we listen and we wonder are we in the same

country. that is what we wonder. of course we deal with the personal loss, shock. just looking at the level of violence here, and as indicated in her statement yesterday, of course i condemn these acts of violence in the strongest terms possible because they are so into what we are trying to do and the department of justice is on the ground in louisiana, working with the local officials they are. from the fbi, atf and the marshals service. i'm so glad to see my directors hear also from the service is. they had dispatched their truth as well to offer assistance, not just of the line first level, but the big services level. we know sometimes after the cameras leave and as the crime scene tape gets pulled away, the family still has to deal with the loss, very real, very immediate terms. we are working to work on those issues as soon as possible.

of course as our president said yesterday, there is no justification what the lever for violent against law enforcement. i know that i stand with all of you when i say that my thoughts and prayers are with those lives that were lost, the families they left behind, who needed them like everyone needs a parent, a brother, a sibling. everyone needed them and they will need all of us more than ever. i know also be inherent noble that everyone in this room feels that unique perspective and the particular pain that is born of the broader experiences that we breathe air and the broader world in which we live. after the tragic murders of the five officers in dallas, two weeks ago one dedicated lack police officer of louisiana, officer montreux jackson gave voice to the dichotomy that is so often in those upon us when he wrote so poignantly and words

that i noble at go with everyone in this room, he wrote in uniform might get nasty hateful looks. and out of uniform, and some consider me a threat. and yet, even still, he urged all americans, this man, this guardian of the community, this protect her of all of our values, he urged all americans, of every background and

who seek to pin blame on something that is really so difficult to discern. we must not let hatred of our hearts. the pain that you feel when you lose a friend or loved one is the same pain. it is the same pain. the hopes and the dreams that we have four children features the same. it is the same. the anxiety, the worry we feel when they go out into the world, it is the same.

we always have to remember that we share not just a country, but this brief moment of life together in the issues, the complex and challenging issues that these tragedies have brought to the floor can only be met if we find ways to work together. i know that you know this, but i'm here to tell you as we approach this challenge, as we deal with this issue, as we look into the heart of this country, the voice of this organization, the voice of noble, the voice of all of you is needed more than ever. we need you to speak to the loss of humanity that occurs when an ambassador judged at a glance whether by the color of our skin or the color of our uniform. any advice. noble has been at the forefront of these issues since its inception. from the time avoid feeling to the present day.

[applause] you have looked people in the eye. you have talked to children. you have talked people down from the hatred that compared this country apart. you have been there. we have done this. we need you more than ever. noble has carried the banner of community policing that is at the forefront of all the discussion now and we need you to raise it even higher in these challenging times. i am here to commit to use out today that this department of justice's standing with you. we will stand beside you in this effort. [applause] we are absolutely determined. we have been working on this for years, but now it is time. we are determined to do everything we can to heal the

risks and restore trust, but most of all, now is the time to insure every american, everyone under the sheltering arm of our constitution feels respected, feel supported, feel safe. everyone, no matter the color of their skin, the color of their uniform, where they live, where they work. this is all our house. this is all their house and we have to protect it. [applause] some of the things we are too many say proud to do at the department of defense the recommendation of the president's task force on 21st century police. i know that noble was behind so many of those pillars. it is a blueprint for promoting effective crime production while building public trust and it works. it works. this can be done. we arouse the working with our local partners, offering funding, offering technical

assistance. de-escalation training and education and implicit bias. of course you know we are for education throughout the line first in a community and just last month, i am pleased to note that the department of justice has committed to implicit bias training for every federal law-enforcement officer in the department and every prosecutor practicing under the shield of the department of justice. [applause] every single one. many of you know that our civil rights division is working every day to ensure cost you two should all policing, to ensure accountability and to work to rebuild trust. many of you know our office of justice programs. i know you know our cops office. i even know you know the work he is doing and the work he will continue to do, the tools they need, the training they require to come home, to come home

safely, to train and officer safety and wellness. these incidents don't end when the cameras go away. our brothers and sisters who wear the badge, who carry our safety on the shoulders every day go home without we still on them. they go back on duty with the weight still on them. they go back on shift with the weight still on them and we have to deal with those issues also. that's just a much a part of protecting our officers as providing them with a vest. we're also working to support local jurisdictions as they work and they are working so hard on innovative and collaborative initiatives that bring communities together. the communities of officers, to commune these of residence, all those communities, all our house coming together. these are -- we are tremendously

proud to stand behind the department of justice. to say we have more work to do is to utter a profound understatement. it is to simply note what is so clear across this country. we have to continue working, continued to read building mistrust between law enforcement and the communities we are so honored there. we also have to work to guarantee each justice and the law, so the perception of justice matches the reality. and we have to continue to build a safer, more perfect union that remains our common goal. i'm tremendously proud to stand with noble today and every day to advance the mission, to support the cause and to stand with you to realize the promise together. as part of that, i could not be more honored to introduce to you someone who truly needs no introduction. a friend, a worker, someone who has put his shoulder to the grind stone on all of these issues for years.

someone who has made the pursuit of justice his life's work. attorney general, eric holder. [applause] is your friend. has your colleague. he came to the department of justice is a 25-year-old law school graduate, insuring public officials met their responsibilities to the american people and he has never stopped in that goal. over the course of what has truly been an extraordinary career as u.s. attorney, as a judge, as the deputy attorney general and as the attorney general of these united states, he has advanced to the fundamental beliefs that have animated him from the beginning,

that animate this global gathering and animate one person at its best. but every individual deserves the quality. every individual deserves respect and that every individual, every individual no matter where they are from, no matter what you look like, no matter where you are born, no matter who you love, every individual deserves to enjoy the full blessing of american life. throughout his tenure as attorney general, eric holder demonstrated this commitment. he lived face. he walked this walk every day. every single day. not just with words, but with his action. ps how to advance the dignity and equality of our algae bt sisters and brothers and their family. he suspended our most fundamental rights, including the right to vote. he has held so dear and that is the right as we know

increasingly being attacked, particularly from communities of color. he has worked to resolve generations old dispute through his groundbreaking efforts in indian country, living up to the original americans. he is that you decisively to reform criminal justice system but the smart on crime initiative. he has transformed the way in which we do spend justice in this country. that is no small task. and he has always, always toiled to rebuild the trust between law enforcement and the community we serve, through every part of his career and every day of his tenure as attorney general. we know that these actions weren't always easy to take because the best things often are. the most important things are never easy. he faced opposition. he faced hostility. but he recognized.

he knew in his bones as public servants, it is our responsibility to approach the difficult issues with the fierce urgency that they desired because he understood, as all of us in this room do, by stating in place and doing nothing will only erode the progress that so many have fought to achieve. i remember his lessons every day as i walk into the office of the attorney general and i strive to live up to them. most important money, we cannot hurt and future generations with the result of our lost time, our inaction or missed opportunities. the time to act is now. we must build the foundation of progress against those that will come behind us the chance to scale heights that we never thought we could reach. we have to strive everyday to push our best efforts forward to the work that remains at hand. as the idea that defined this

organization, the work that will live beyond us to make this country a better place if the idea is to find eric holder's entire career, the principal that guides us today. i believe it is your theme, justice by action. justice by action, then, now and tomorrow. my friends, and the word honorable just a title until it is inhabited by someone who lives it every day, someone whose moral compass has remained steadfast and true from its first job to the current moment. someone who has endured challenging difficulty in the service of this mission in order to shield those who are working to advance the goals of justice and equality. someone like our award recipient. you could not have graced this award with a better or more inspirational name.

you could not have found a more deserving or more inspirational figure to lead us today. and now, my friend, it is my great honor. it is my privilege to introduce to you my predecessor, my colleague and my friend, the 82nd attorney general at the united states, the honorable eric h. holder. [applause] [applause]

>> well, good morning. we live in troubled times beset by violence directed at those who are sworn to protect us, necessary community law enforcement relations that are afraid. high-powered weapons of war and subject to rhetoric that is too often overheated and factually inaccurate. our nation finds itself, i believe, at a crossroads. too many people are retreating to ideological corners in failing to meaningfully engage with one another. on some of the pressing issues of the day. painful truths and hard questions are avoided and

demagogues have been given unnecessary attention and also political opportunity. now that may raise just a new unassailable truths. police officers are the sentinels of our civilization, of our democracy. they must be good at all costs. when there was a spike an officer related shootings a few years ago, the summit meeting at the justice department that noble attended and programs were put in place to dramatically reduce the steps in subsequent years. it is not enough for us to praise bob course meant after cops are killed. we must value to and equip them with all the necessary tools and tactics while they are still alive. when a police officer -- [applause] and when a police officer is killed in the line of duty, the

harshest punishment, the ultimate punishment must be held out. an attack on a police officer is an attack on society itself in and simply not the can down. as a nation, we must ask ourselves why those who comprise the thin blue line are forced to confront i'm far too frequent a basis weapons that are designed to kill and to name in combat situations. we have recently seen to frequently officer deaths connected to evil perpetrators and connection of assault rifles. it is time. it is far past time for those of you in law enforcement to join with others of all americans and take on the mindless industry driven gun lobby, its values and the logical individual ability to affect military grade weapons more than the lives of the

american people in general and our law enforcement personnel in particular. speak out. [applause] we must also come to realize that keeping our officers if it's not in consistent with ensuring that those in line for his men treat the people they are sworn to serve with dignity, respect and fairness. there is simply no tension between those two goals. we are not being honest with ourselves if we were a pathway to many in too many communities suffer through unfair treatment at the hands of view and one forced. that history has spread distrust coupled with recent technological advancements in documenting and length of misconduct long complained of is not hard to understand why that exist between communities of color or in most means of effective law enforcement and those sworn to protect these

same communities. going forward, we must foster not only open, often times painful dialogue between these groups, but also develop concrete measures to bring together law in force in the neighborhood in which they work. now, this is not politically correct. this is not a politically correct thing. it is law enforcement that will make communities and the officers at the men's a fair. noble, with roots in both communities have i believe, a unique respect to any special responsibility. you must lead where others dare not to go. you must speak out when others are comfortably silent. you must take on those forces more concerned with ideological as and the welfare of the people you serve and serve with. you must be willing to risk short-term unpopularity that

overtime history will judge you to be right. [applause] this will not be easy. but in its 40 year history, noble has often been unafraid to be conscious of law enforcement. now more than ever, it is time to take on number one again. confronting truth is at times a difficult endeavor. good skier in reality tuning paint a seemingly comfortable, but ultimately unjust status quo serves no one well. as always, noble, you must lead your greatly honored to receive an award that will be grateful to my successor for presenting it to me. i hope that in the years coming up will be bestowed upon men and women who are not afraid to speak truth to power and doing

great tradition of this great organization hoped to craft solutions to new problems air force to confront and old issues that have for centuries. never forget that positive change, though possible, is not promised. it is the result of hard work, sacrifice and enduring failure. i am confident that noble, as it always has will have to lead our country to see future infused with the change that will be so long for a nation. thank you all again. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] >> we are a little off program, but we are going to do what we do. we adjust. that may take you back to a national and that was sung by chief of police gregory thomas -- excuse me, gregory harris. this is gregory thomas. [applause] chief of police at the north carolina school of art,

winston-salem, north carolina. what did you think of his rendition of lift every voice? [applause] i suppose you want to know who all these folks are sitting out here. let me just introduce our guest this morning. starting to my far right, gerald nelson, regional and national vice president. [applause] national surgeon in her, cj davis. if you hold your applause until i get through the whole list here. it will go a lot quicker a promise. >> national champion. clarence e. cox to third, national second vice president. kerry tarrant come your current

first national vice president and two days your national president. broderick johnson, assistant to the president secretary and chair of my brothers task force on national president. dwayne crawford, noble office. hubert, 2016 cochair and our national treasure. brien mcrae, 2016 conference cochair, federal assistance to the national president. matthew arthur barroso, chief of police, u.s. capitol police department. marita jay bryant, region two national vice president. patrick labonte, region three national vice president. gregory c