campaign of action, which is an important step forward. >> when you were last year here, you proposed, and i was very impressed, a fresh approach to international relations based on the notion of enlightened sovereignty. i liked very much this definition. and you defined it as a natural extension of enlightened self-interest, and which is, i quote, less about lofty promises and real results, less about narrow self-interest in sovereignty's name. an expanded few of mutual interest in which there is no room for -- room, only room for all to grow and prosper. if you look back, is the world moving into this direction? >> i think that through the g-20

process it is. it's slow and imperfect. but i do think -- i do think broadly speaking there is a realization that we're all in this boat together. you know, i go back to the great crisis of late '08, early '09 when, you know, we had this torrent of this avalanche of flood of bad news and crisis, and we very quickly found it was affecting all of us. and therefore the solutions have to engage all of us. i'm not suggesting for a second that countries won't and don't and shouldn't pursue self-interest. but i think we should always ask ourselves, and this is obviously most important the bigger the country and the more influential, are the choices we are making and the approaches we are taking, are they compatible with everyone else doing the same or similar things? because i think if any one of us, and in particular big players take a course of action

that can only work for them, then that renders the entire system that we're all a part of unstable and uncertain. and i do see some signs incrementally at all of these various g-20 conferences that we are moving to that understanding to actions based on them. but i don't want to exaggerate. the new world isn't completely at our doorstep. >> prime minister, when we listen to president calderon just a half an hour ago, i think many people were impressed, including myself, about the high number of people who are turned out by universities, particularly also in those areas which are related to innovation. what is your -- you spoke about innovation rapidly. but how do you want to enact, really, innovation? >> well, there is two things.

in canada, since we came to office, we have tried effect a bit of a shift. the reality in canada is this. we have very high level of spending of the canadian public sector on science and technology, research and innovation. the fact of the matter is we don't have the private level of spending that would match that, and we haven't seen the kind of private sector results and results and commercialization that we have been seeking. so one of the first things we did when we announced our first science and technology policy was putting a substantial new emphasis on commercialization and the encouragement of partnerships between researchers and private sector. and, you know, to be frank, that initially caused some pushback in the academic community. but our experience has been that the canadian academic community adapted very quickly to that.

and we saw the changes we want there. we haven't seen the changes we really want to see on the private sector side. now this is, of course, a great generalization because there is of course canadian companies that are cutting-edge innovators. but broadly speaking, the canadian -- the canadian side of the community is not as innovative as it needs to be. we've done a report on that. that report has looked at a range of our expenditure and tax policies and government structures, given us some pretty sweeping recommendations. while we don't necessarily subscribe to all the recommendations, we certainly subscribe to the diagnosis of the problem and to the nature of the kind of changes that have to be made. and we will be -- we will be making those. i would say this, though. you know, we're not under any illusion. this is a longer term culture shift that has to happen in many segments of the canadian economy. but we're certainly prepared to work with business to see that happen. because i agree with you. it isn't just necessary for

advanced economies in the future to continue to work hard and invest well and make good decisions. the nature of our economy is we have to be innovative. we have to be at the high end of the value chain, and the innovation is going to be critical. >> can you-you export -- if i call a canadian model, and i should tell you, prime minister, you know in our competitiveness report, which we publish every year, the canadian banks rank usually the soundest banking system. and we have seldom so many reference to a statement which we are making. compared with this one. now you have a kind of model. can it be exported to other countries? >> i think some aspects are more easily exported than others. let me give you a couple of examples. the one you asked about, the

banking system, you know, through the g-20, through basil 3, through the work we have been co-chairing with india on international financial regulatory reform and the work obviously that mark is doing through the financial stability board, we are trying to encourage international practices, international forms and regulation that look very canadian that are i think strong, prudential, comprehensive. but at the same time, not excessive or punitive or that attempt to micromanage financial institutions. that's what we're trying to do. i think we're having some success. the part of the model that it's more difficult to export is the fact that the canada financial sector has a particular struck church, where the banking side

and the insurance side are dominated by a relatively small number of large players. and that enables a really comprehensive interaction of independent government regulators with the people that they are regulating. and keeping that independence, but also that interaction and flow of information. and understanding of the real world is something that would be difficult to replicate in europe at large or in the united states. so there are some limits. but i think broadly speaking, we can do that. another aspect i think of the canadian model is that i do think among certainly developed countries we really have been for a very long time been on the cutting edge of incorporating, accepting and incorporating and benefitting from great cultural diversity. now i'm not sure that we have made the full use of that in terms of international trade that we really should be making of it. but we certainly have for the

most part created a society where cultural diversity has led to greater mutual understanding among people rather than to stark divisions and ghettoization of the population. that's -- you know, that's obviously a model that has developed because of canada's unique history and practices over a long period of time. and while i think it's essential in all parts of the world, especially developed economies, it's obviously not something that you know is easily learned or exported overnight. >> prime minister, you have here in the room some of the most prominent canadian business leaders. if you had one wish, it's a good opportunity outside of canada to have a wish towards your business leaders. what would it be? >> a wish for my -- >> for your business leaders. >> well, we always call on them to support the government. and look, actually canadian business community have been very good about supporting

government initiatives that are helpful to the economy. look, as we say, our biggest -- our biggest wish with canadian business is, you know, just a sector that is more innovative, that is looking broader at opportunities beyond merely our own market and a that of the united states. but i think in fairness, professor, the business leaders who are represented here are probably already in that category. so our work is really with the broader business community. >> so you can be proud of your business community? >> we're very proud of them. especially when they're right in front of me. >> and i hope they are proud -- and i hope they are proud of their prime minister. thank you very much, prime minister. >> thank you. i appreciate the time. [ applause ]

>> with talk of possible legislation to improve the nation's cyberdefenses, former cia director john mclaughlin discusses dealing with national aware oness of national threats from an aspen homeland security event. >> i have an alarming thought about all of this, which is in some ways the discussions about cyber mirrors a bit the discussion we used to have about terrorism back in the '80s and '90s. there was a great deal of difficulty coming to a national consensus about what to do about it until we had 9/11, which then crystallized everything. and we knew what to do and the nation moved forward. we haven't had that kind of event in cyber yet. we imagine it. we talk about it. the attack on zappos, the attack on stratford, where i lost my credit card, the only good thing that comes out of those is i think a few more of those and there will be growing public awareness that this is a serious vulnerability that i think will then overcome some of the

private sector reservations about working with the government on this. >> watch the rest of the discussion and more about homeland security online at the c-span video library, archive and searchable at c-span.org/videolibrary. it would be intolerable if a handful of violent people, and that is what it is, just a handful, could harden us against needed change. i've seen an uglier victims too and it perverts the spirit of america. i saw it at the republican convention in 1964 when governor rockefeller was shouted down. i saw it in maps when governor wallace, a man with whom i disagree, was heckled into silence. and it happened to me in philadelphia. we must give notice to this violent few. there are millions of decent americans who are willing to sacrifice for change. but they want to do it without being threatened. and they want to do it peacefully. they are the nonviolent majority. black and white. who are for change without violence. these are the people whose voice i want to be.

>> as candidates campaign for president this year, we look back at 14 men who ran for the office and lost. go to our website, c-span.org/thecontenders to see video of the contenders who had a lasting impact on american politics. >> our ancestors came across the ocean in sailing ships you wouldn't go across a lake in. when they arrived there was nothing here. they built their tiny little cabins and they did it with neighbors helping one another, not federal grants. they came here because they wanted to be free. and they wanted to practice the religion of their choice. and after 200 years, too many of us take those privileges for granted. >> c-span.org/thecontenders. now another chance to see the canadian prime minister, stephen harper, in his first question period of the year.

opposition leaders challenge prime minister harper on his remarks at the world economic forum on changing the pension plan in canada. other issues discussed were the new crime bill and the economy. this is about 45 minutes. >> mr. speaker, canadians are bracing themselves for the deepest round of cuts since paul martin. cuts to services canadians need like oes. this will hurt seniors for jobs and hurt our communities. when will the prime minister tell canadians the bad news? on his next trip to switzerland or somewhere else in the world? >> well, mr. speaker, of course this government received a mandate to gradually reduce our deficit to zero. well will do that while protecting the social programs the canadians cherish. that has been the commitment

we've made to the canadian people. at the same time le we will ensure that our vital programs are sustainable for the long-term and for future generations. >> the prime minister went to switzerland to announce before the millionaire's club that the conservatives will take an ax to the old age security benefits. it's obscene and insulting for seniors. instead of attacking poverty among seniors, the conservatives are attacking seniors themselves. why does the prime minister want to cut old age security benefits? tell us. >> translator: that's quite the contrary, mr. speaker. i am clear that we do not intend to cut payments to seniors. on the contrary we are going to protect our seniors. at the same time, mr. speaker, we are making sure that the system, the retirement income system will remain sustainable for now and for the future.

[ applause ] >> translator: mr. speaker, i don't think that answered my question. we know full well that the next budget will be about choices. he could help seniors. he could restrengthen the pension systems, but he prefers to continue to cut corporate taxes. he has billions for mega prisons. and f-35s that don't work. and the group that will be the first to pay for those choices is our seniors. it's really lacking respect for our seniors who have given so much to canadians. mr. speaker, our seniors want to know why is this government targeting our seniors first? >> the right honorable prime minister. the ndp leader is not listening we are not cutting programs for our seniors. on the contrary, we are going to

reduce the deficit to zero as we have promised during the election campaign without cuts to our seniors. at the same time, mr. speaker, we are making sure that the system, the retirement income system will remain sustainable for future generations. >> translator: but if he continues like that, mr. speaker, it will be goodbye charlie brown. that's sure, mr. speaker, because this government is more concerned with ceos rather than seniors and families. he has given generous tax cuts to major corporations that are already taking in astronomical amounts of money, and this same government is telling seniors that there is no money left for them to be able to retire with dignity. seniors cannot trust this government. why are they offering more gifts to ceos and slamming the door on seniors and families? why?

>> translator: the honorable, mr. speaker, that is completely false. what we will do is protect the retirement system that we have in place for our seniors, and our seniors built this great country. but we have to make sure that this system will be there for future generations. and we are protecting -- and we will protect these future generations and this system. >> the minister saying they're going to do to pensions to what they did to service canada. this government is choosing to spend billions on a misguided prison agenda and tax giveaways to profitable corporations while planning to cut billions from old age security and the service canadians rely on. at the same time as a quarter of a million seniors in canada live in poverty, and hundreds of thousands of canadians' families are out of work, and they struggle just to get by. seniors can't trust this government. the prime minister was so concerned about cutting oes, why

didn't he say anything about it during the election? why did he hide his agenda during the last election campaign? [ applause ] >> has it all wrong. we're not cutting what we're doing is we're going to preserve the system that exists for canadians, the retirement system that already exists. seniors will not lose a penny. but what we have to do, mr. speaker is make sure -- we have to make sure that going forward, we do have a sustainable system. the old age security system isn't sustainable now. we're going to make it that for generations in the future. >> the honorable member from toronto center. >> mr. speaker, in fact the prime minister did address this question during the election campaign. the prime minister stated categorically during the leader's debate, he stated as recently as november that this government was not going to be touching transfers to individuals and transfers to seniors. now the -- he explicitly said

that. now the minister comes up with a davos answer there is an election answer. there is a davos answer. which is it, mr. speaker? is the prime minister committed to sustaining seniors, or is he committed to breaking his election promises and breaking faith with the people of canada? >> the right honorable prime minister -- of course, mr. speaker, this government ran on very clear commitments, and we're acting on those commitments that commitment is to reduce our deficit to zero gradually without cutting transfers to individuals or to provinces. and that's been very clear. at the same time, mr. speaker, we do have the opportunity to look ahead, to look at the challenges that these programs face in the future, and to make sure that these programs will be available and will be viable for the future generations that need them. >> members of toronto center. >> the prime minister of canada can't have it both ways. he cannot go to the canada people and his minister, his treasury board was saying on exactly the same day as the

prime minister was giving his statement in davos that the president of the treasuryreassu would be no cuts to the provinces, and there would be no cuts to transfers to individual seniors. but the prime minister is saying today -- what the prime minister is saying and what we hear very clearly also from the minister of human resources is the exact opposite. it's the davos reneg, mr. speaker, it's the politics of deceit and abandonment. >> order. >> the honorable prime minister. >> mr. speaker, the leader of liberal party is challenged when it comes to listening to the answer. we've been very clear as we reduce the deficit we're not cutting transfers to either provinces and individuals. everybody understands there are demographic realities that threaten the viability of these programs. over the longer term we will make sure these programs are funded and viable for the future generations that need them.

>> here. >> i don't have a problem hearing the answers, mr. speaker. the problem is that the answers change. it depends on where we are. if it's during an election, then there's lots of promises. the demographic change is not something, mr. speaker, that happened last week. in fact, the demographic change is a factor -- was a factor during the election, and that is when the promises were made and not only with the prime minister but from aum the conservative party members who did exactly the same promises. we're talking about the politics of abandonment and deconcrete, mr. speaker. the right honorable prime minister. thank you, mr. speaker for talking about deceit. it's the liberal party which made record cuts in transfers to the provinces and individuals.

for this government our commitment is clear. we're going to eliminate the deficit without cutting transfers to the provinces or individuals and at the same time, mr. speaker, we have a responsibility to future generations to ensure this system will be viable for the future and that is what we will do. >> mr. speaker, the conservatives failed in the commitment to the 2004 health accords including expanding reform care and getting prescription drug costs under control. now the prime minister made the situation even worse by telling the premieres elreduce the canada health transfer. mr. speaker, fixing our health care system must by done by lab rating the provinces. why this government slamming the door in their face? >> the honorable minister of health. >> thank you, mr. speaker as

state brd our government is committed to a universal publicly funded health care system and we have increased funding it to record levels. we have announced a long-term stable funding arrangement with the provinces and the territories that we'll see transfers reach historic levels of $40 billion by the end of the decade. thank you, mr. speaker. >> mr. speaker, they can't escape the reality that they're take it is in direct opposition to the principles of the health care. canadians worry it leads to greater privatization undermining the foundation of medicare. canadians don't want to see one health care system for the wealthy and one for everybody else. i ask again, mr. speaker, why is this government abandoning the leadership role in health care and making canadians pay the price? what happened to their commitment to accountability? >> the honorable minister of health. >> thank you. mr. speaker, as indicated by the

recent canadian institute of health information data, the federal transfers are projected to grow faster than average provincial spending on health care. i will continue to work with my colleagues to make sure that had canada's health system's mother sustainable and to improve accountability and to deliver better services to canadians. thank you, mr. speaker. p >> translator: mr. speaker, canadians are right to be squared about the upcoming conservative budget because the announced cuts could be twice as high as expected. the president of the treasury board, a man known for great transparency, talks about imposing cuts in the order of 10%. that is $8 billion in public services that disappear. this government simply does not understand the reality. blind cuts is not the answer. getting rid of good jobs is not the answer. reducing the quality of services is not the answer. why will this government make

families and workers pay for six years of mi conservatives. the honorable president of the treasury board. mr. speaker, canadians gave us a solid, strong mandate to our government to to make the decisions on behalf of all canadians. and to look at the situation. >> i will say, mr. speaker, with that mandate as a prime minister has just said today, we have and are working on working on a plan for balance in a reasonable period of time. a reasonable and fair plan for kanld yans as well as for themselves to consider. >> the honorable member. mr. speaker, i had not expected such a response. already we can see irresponsible cuts by government having aa negative impact on people. we can think of those who are

involved in the endless red tape and immigration system people have to wait weeks to get benefits and the government should understand that a false majority does not give them the right to cut the majority of programs. why is this government persisting in compensating major corporations profitable not creating jobs here instead of protecting the services that people need. >> the honorable trez of the treasury board. i said mr. speaker it's essential to have an action plan with regard to the cuts in order to improve the situation with regard to the deficit, that is our plan. it's a plan that we talked about during the previous election campaign, and this was part of our 2011 budget. it's essential for this country to have an action plan. >> we'll do to in a reasonable ernment has money for

its friends but not for ordinary canadians. mr. sfeeshger, while the prime minister muses about cutting benefits to senior,cu hurting canadian seniors, some are waiting six to eight months just to get their cpp or old age security. they don't have eight months of savings in the bank and they can't pay for food and medications. why does had this government want to make the problems worse by cutting more services to canadians. >> this is the statement. we're trying to make sure that all canadians get the benefits they're entitled to anyway timely manner. it helps if people submit nir applications on time and they're complete and accurate. mr. speaker, it also helps with the employers. order. the minister has a flare. >> speaker it helps for employers to do the same. we are working to be the short process and do it quickly as

possible. that's why we brought an additional 400 people to help that process along. >> the honorable member. >> what's shameless is this government's cuts to services that canadians depend on. mr. speaker, it's not just unemployed canadians and seniors hurting but canadian businesses as well. they process labor market opinions in time for companies that need foreign workers. many companies have to pay to have their application processed twice or have to send their foreign workers home. why won't the government acknowledge the problems they're causing and reverse these cuts? >> they were complaining that we were allowing temporary foreign workers, and what we're trying to do is protect the integrity of that system to make sure people that come are not replacing canadians that have those jobs instead.

we try to make sure that temporary foreign workers that come in come forl legitimate jobs so they're not abused. we want tro protect those workers and canadians. that's why we take the time to make sure the jobs are real and applicants are for real. >> speaker, instead of working with the provinces to make you're streets and communities safer, conservatives are forcing their ineffective and costly prison agendas on canadians $1 billion alone. why won't the government work with the provinces instead of downloading costs? don't they agree with democrats that pensions and services that canadians rely on every day have a higher priority than the billions spent on their president's agenda. >> the honorable minister of justice. >> there's so many inaccuracies in there mr. speaker i don't know where to begin. ontario had theme