be done? >> she's leading that process. >> in response to a previous report from the inspector again, we have been -- we have created and are deploying a tool to assess productivity which includes -- i would guess by early -- the end of this calendar year, early next year. >> then you will have a firm grip on how many medical staff you will need to have when that process is done because you will have set up standards for doctors? >> yes. in addition to how many support staff do they need to make them as efficient as productive as possible. >> i want to kick back to something else the ig said. i tried to pin him down on the staffing thing. he said, staffing is part of it. the other part is facilities. where are you going to put these doctors and medical staff if you hire them? i can tell you in montana, facilities -- i don't know if they are as big of a problem but

they are close to as big a problem as not having people. you have doctors there but you don't have examination rooms. do you have a construction plan moving forward? i know it's unfair. you have been in the job six weeks. i'm not trying to be critical. >> it's five, actually. >> all right. >> obviously, you are right. facilities are very important. the action you took with the bill gives us the ability to have 27 more facilities. not surprisingly, one of the facilities will go in phoenix where, obviously, we have a need. we have an issue right now that we're working. it's around leasing. we have been following an appropriate, i think, strategy of leasing facilities rather than building them. because the population is moving. you have talked about the increase in veterans in montana. we're currently working through the gsa on this process. because the --

>> to get down to it, i appreciate you telling me what you are doing. all i want to know is, do you have a construction plan moving forward for the next year, three years, five years? so that you can come to us -- some of us are appropriators -- and say, we need this much money if we're going to serve the veterans coming back. >> we have a construction plan. we're going to be renewing our forecasting as you mentii menti because i'm not satisfied our forecasting is robust enough. >> it's pushed out for two years. is it open to all hospitals? let's say the great falls hospital wants to get in the program. what do they do? >> let us know. again, we look through the lens of the veteran. if it's good for the veteran, we want to do it. >> in rural areas, that's going

to be critic cal. i have other questions i'm going to put on the record for you as we move forward. know that i know you are committed to the job. i know you are surrounding your people. middle management has been a problem not only with this administration but the previous one. you need to hold them account blg. >> i want to spend time with you on the plan road to veterans day. we are going to reorganize the department. we have nine different geographic maps for this department. we have 14 websites that require different user name and password. the veteran doesn't want that. the veteran wants one map, up with website. that will flatten the hierarchy that you describe and provide for information coming up and down a lot more quickly. >> thank you for your work. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for visiting reno.

>> reno and las vegas. >> and las vegas. on behalf of myself and the governor, perhaps minus relocating and locating in the state of nevada, it was a terrific opportunity for him to discuss with you, as myself, the concerns that we both share about nevada's veterans. >> you are welcome. may i say that working with the state governments is important for our success. >> you are proving that. thank you for doing so. i want to talk about the nevada -- as you are aware, the inspector general's report, they did a v.a. two year claims initiative and were able to recognize in 32% of those claims reviewed were inaccurate. unfortunately for the state of nevada, that ig report that they did in june, found that 51% of the claims reviewed were

inaccurate. that being the case, have you had an opportunity to review these reports from the ig? >> i have. but i also have to say that i have asked the ig to give me all of the reports over the last five years and to give me a triage version of those reports. i want to go back and i want to look at all of the reports that have been issued and not acted upon. i do know the situation in reno having been there. we have new leadership on the ground. we're making some progress. but we're not to where we need to be. the new leadership knows that. >> let's talk about that leadership for a moment. as you know, i called for management changes in the reno area. have we -- do we have a permanent director at this point? what's the time line for getting that? >> we have an acting right now. we're in the process of obviously identifying the permanent director. >> you mentioned -- >> we will partner with you on

that. >> okay. you also mentioned that there was a need for four additional employees in that particular office. what's the status of that? >> i have to check the hiring status. but we need more employees in the veterans administration and we need them in that office. there's nothing holding us back from hiring them. we do need more employees in veterans benefit administration. right now we have, as you know in that office and elsewhere around the country, we have all of our employees working mandatory overtime. we're stopping mandatory overtime october 1st because it's not sustainable. but in order to be able to sustain our progress going forward and continuing to drive these claim -- this backlog down, we have to hire more people. there was some money in the bill that was recently passed that was taken out of the bill. i think it was $400 million.

we're going to need some of that money back. we're going to cost save to try to find money to be able to hire those employees and continue to work that backlog time. >> overtime isn't an answer long-term. overtime pay and over working some of these employees probably isn't the answer. i think there really is a str k structural change that needs to happen. at 345 days out for benefits and me medical claim, it's unacceptable at this point. i would hope that additional employees obviously would be one of the answers. whatever the resources necessary -- i talked to management in reno to find out what do you need. they told us additional resources were not necessary. let me know. anything that i can do to be of help, it's unacceptable.

and change needs to occur. i know you haven't been in your position real long. do you have a direction that you really want to go for these wholesale changes that are going to be necessary to reduce these backlogs? >> we have made progress. the claim backlog is down by 56%. i think deputy secretary gibson said the changes in the administration over the last couple years have been astounding. but you are right. we have done it by brute force. what we need to do now is reengineer the process and get the resources we need to do it in a sustainable basis and drive down the backlog to zero. >> we have initiatives here. we would like to offer our services any way that we can. i want to change directions real quickly. that's on women veterans. there are nearly 2.3 million women veterans that have served

in the military. that number, as you know, is continuing to grow. since you have been secretary, have you reviewed the care and services for these women veterans to make sure it's adequate? >> i have. we have work to do. in fact, every stop i go to, whether it's phoenix, memphis, las vegas, i go into the medical center, one thing that strikes me is how is we built facilities years ago for male veterans. there weren't female veterans. i also check in to see, do we have medical practitioners and ob/gyn. i look in the labs, are we making prosthetics -- we were talking about gary of disabled american veterans. we have done a study on what it means to make a prosthetic for a female who is pregnant. these are things that we have never had to deal with before. now with 11%, 12% of the veteran

population being female, as you indicated continuing to increase in numbers, these are things we have to get after. >> i think it may take legislation to expand this care. i'm eager to help your administration and moving forward. i think something needs to be done and look forward to assisting. >> we would love to partner with you on that. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. senator murray. >> thank you very much. before i ask my question, i want to say, thank you for asking that question. there's a lot of work left to do in terms of privacy, in terms of doctors that know how to care for women. but we also know that one of the barriers for women to get care is childcare. if you don't have a place to leave your kid that's safe, you don't show up. for mental health, this is a serious issue. i would love to work with you on that as well. mr. secretary, thank you for being here. i want to start with talking about the fact that the ig found several cases in which veterans

face delays in care or substantial care and took their own lives. v.a.'s newest wait time shows it takes too long to get into care. the ig's findings said meeting the wait time isn't enough. veterans need to be assigned to a regular provider. they need care co-or natuordina to get the care they need when they need it. we have been working on this for a long time now. i wanted to ask you today, why do you think the v.a. continues to struggle well providing appropriate mental healthcare? >> senator murray, i think mental healthcare is a problem in the united states. i think it's a problem in the v.a. one of the things that excites me about this job is that many of the things we see at the v.a. is we're kind of the pathfinder for the country.

whether it's, for example, the use of the bar code for -- in a hospital to make sure somebody gets good care. i think one of the things we have to do is we have to increase the number of students studying mental health in school. i met with 17 residents at duke who graduated all working at the v.a. one was way psychiatrist. i asked the question, why are young people not going into psychiatry and mental health? because it's an area that we're learning a lot more about today than we knew in the past. my father-in-law, who was a prisoner of war in world war ii, he was not down over germany. he walked across germany. i sure he had post-traumatic stress but we didn't know what to call it. he never wanted to talk about it until he joined a group of pows who felt comfortable talking about it. what they told me was the biggest issue is that insurance

reimbursements for mental health are far below the cost. so somehow we have to get a handle on what's going on in this area and find ways to encourage people to go to school for mental health. in all of my recruiting speeches, i have talked about the importance of mental health. i'm trying to encourage young people to get into the discipline. i think it's a national problem. v.a. is on the cutting edge of it. >> continue work on that. that, to me is a serious issue. tea it's a country issue. our veterans are at the front of the line. we have to make sure we have providers but we have the understanding across the v.a. and across the culture of the v.a. to really watch for this. in your testimony you talked about improving the department's leadership training and breaking down some of the bureaucracy as a way of enhancing accountability. i liked your chart.

but there's a lot of people between you and them. we need to make -- >> that's why i gave out my cell phone number. >> we need to look at everything from training new clinic managers to oversight and effective intervention by medical centers and network leaders. how do you make sure that these changes happen at all of those levels across the v.a.? it's a huge system. >> it's a huge system. it starts by getting out and going to these different sites and meeting the people and understanding, are we providing the right leadership? do we have the right strategic choice snz do we have the right system snz are we doing things that repeatbly will lead to a good result? do we have the right culture? for example, i was at a site -- i was in reno. a young person was talking to me in a town hall about ways we can improve our computer system. one of the senior managers stepped in front to try to stop the conversation.

and i had tho ask that senior manager to move out of the way. it just wasn't appropriate. i was in philadelphia last week. this was the site that had a training program on town halls that used oscar the grouch in there. i had to talk to those employees about, no matter what the intent, perception is important. it's not acceptable. so we have to dive into the culture and dig and figure out what's going on that's wrong and set the example to do it right. i tell everyone to call me bob. i was bob before i became secretary. i'm going to be bob after i'm done being secretary. that's not trite. that's done because we need to flatten the hierarchy. we need people to be like a family, to call each other by their first names, to feel comfortable turning in problems. we need to reward people who turn in problems, not chastise

them. so these are some of the things we're doing. it's hard work but it's under way. >> okay. really quickly, you said you have committed the v.a. to acquiring and fielding a modern scheduling system. can you tell me when you think that will be done and the training for employees to use that? >> right now, we're doing some quick fixes on the established system. those quick fixes are coming out periodically over next few months. to really change the whole system and bring in a new one is going to take some time. but we would like it to be done in 2015. >> and that includes the training? >> yes, of course. in fact, when you put in a new system, we want to commission it, we want to verify people know how to use it before they sit down and are qualified to use it. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, senator murray. >> thank you. mr. secretary i don't think i

will call you bob. mr. secretary, thank you very much for your presence, as i said earlier. a series of convoluted questions related to the same topic. i would like to offer my assistance as have i done with previous secretaries. you have testified, the chairman of this committee has great interest in trying to help the v.a. have the necessary professionals to meet the needs of veterans. i have asked previous v.a. secretary for how can i help? what tools don't you have to help solve this problem with no response. again, if there's changes in the law, programs that are necessary to encourage loan forgiveness, whatever the story is that would help you attract professionals, i would like to be of assistance. i would like to be an ally. here is my scenario of a couple of stories. lee man had the good fortune of

being told he didn't drive for hours to have a colonoscopy. that's good news. that suggests there's a change afoot. thank you. down the road, about an hour in kansas, larry mcentire tells me that last week he drove three hours to get a cortisone shot in his shoulder. he go there several times a week for other minor proceeders. there's a cboc within 25 miles of there, but it doesn't have the professional capability of providing cortisone shots. what does exist is a hospital. a medical center that could provide a cortisone shot that's in the same town as where he lives. certainly less than the 3 1/2 hour drive. on the one hand, we have had

success. on the other, there's still remains issues we're trying to get at within the v.a. and in the implementation. first of all, an implementation of the care act, what -- when the 40 miles is the defining determining factor as to whether or not you can access healthcare, how do you -- how are you going to treat what that cboc is capable of doing in determining whether that veteran lives within 40 miles of a facility? is it a facility or a facility that can perform the service? >> that's a really excellent question. i'm glad you brought it up. one of the technical changes that we're working with the committee on is to give the secretary the authority to interpret that the way it should be interpreted. in other words, let's look at it through lens of the veteran. does it make sense for the veteran to get a cortisone shot closer to home? what makes sense? one of the things we're asking is to give the secretary that

flexibility in the technical changes to the care bill. >> you do not believe you have that authority to make that determination now? >> no, sir. i think but i think just by putting in a phrase, it would be handled. >> and does there seem to be a theme to accomplishing that? >> no, sir. >> then let me go back to march in the interim, before the care act is implemented, which i guess november is the best scenario, you have set aside $25 million for outside of the v.a. care. that, i assume, funding expires at the end of the fiscal year, september 30th, three weeks away. arch is in existence and the care act gives you the authority to do two things with arch. one is to extend the con tratra extend the program.

and the second is to extend the program geography that is currently served by the arch program? >> do you have any questions about your ability to expand the program? >> one of the technical changes that we're asking for in the bill that pertains to arch is the ability to just extend the con traktract that is we alreade which will accelerate the expansion of arch. >> so the care act will allow you to extend the contract? >> it just needs a modest modification. >> but when do those contracts expire? >> i don't think it's the expiration, just as much as it is the assumption that we can use using forward so we can move more quickly. rather than going through an entire rebidding process for recontract. >> arch is not going to go out of business, those pilot programs, before you get a technical change?

let me check on this to make sure. it's extended for six months. the way to do that is this technical change. >> you don't need an expansion -- you don't need technical language to expand for six months. >> to extend for six months, no. >> and your expansion authority? >> we're okay on that. but i think, again, the technical change we're seeking would allow us to accelerate the expansion. >> mr. chairman, with your indulgence, i would only say i was surprised. as an author of this legislation, that the pilot programs were so narrow to begin with. very small geographic areas. my expectation was the v.a. would choose five site that is are statewide. we expect everything to be the program. not a county or two.

do you have an opinion? do you have any thoughts to expand to a bizen geographic area? >> again, consistent with deputy secreta secretary gibson said, we need to look at this, again, from the standpoint of the veteran. if it's good for the veteran, we will expand it. and i think that's what he said, we will expand it. we look forward to working with you on that. >> if you could give us the analysis done by the v.a. that we've asked for for a long time, months. we'd like to see what the report says how you -- the v.a. -- analyzed the department. i would assume it says good things. >> i would assume so. >> all right. it's been a long hearing. it's been a productive hearing -- >> mr. chairman, may i say one thing? >> sure. >> first of all, i want to clarify one comment that i said. first of all, i said funding for vba was roughly $400 million.

that was part of our original $17.6 billion request. it did not end up getting passed. that's why we brought that up. we want to continue to drive down the claims. secondly, i was trying to say earlier, that lea that leasing very important. leasing is a strategy that we're using to move our footprint out, provide greater access and care. right now, we have an issue that we're trying to resolve with the general services administration, gsa, where they rescinded our blanket delegation of authority in july. so now, every one of our lease contracts needs an individual delegation from the usa. those that exceed $2.5 million which many of them do, 59% of the 27 due, need to go through a

relatively laborious process. so we're working with gsa to resolve this. but while we do that, we believe there's a need and a case to be made for an independent, 20-year medical lease authority for v.a. to carry out its mission. and i just want to make sure i've got that one correct. >> this has been a long and on going problem. so we look forward to working with you. >> thank you. >> mr. secretary, dr. clancy, thank you very much for being with us. thank you very much for the hard work that you're putting in right now and for the changes that we're seeing. this hearing ining is now adjou.

the senate homeland security held a hearing today examining the use of military equipment sales by local police. members heard from defense, justice and homeland security officials, including the defense secretary for acquisition, technology and low gustics. he defended his department's transfer of like-new military equipment over to local police departments. here's part of what he had to say. >> i want to clear up -- make sure that the record is clear in response to a question from congress to the defense logistics agency. 33% of the property issued is

new and not used. in other words, almost 40% of what you're giving away has never been used by the military. >> and i apologize for shaking my head earlier. they said condition code a, that's like new. >> we could argue about brand new, new or like new. what in the world are we doing buying things that we're not using? and isn't that a fundamental problem that we need to get at before we even talk about whether all of this stuff is being used appropriately or with training or in a way that makes sense -- common sense. and i guarantee you when i get this list -- and i will. i guarantee you the stuff you're giving away you're continuing to buy. i guarantee it. so tell me how that happens.

>> first of all, we'll have to look at the stuff that's provided in new condition. >> give me an example. it's 36% of what you're giving away. you have no idea of what you're giving away that's new? >> i'll have to go through the list, senator. and i'll be happy to take your question for the record on that. so as fore structure changes, as our budget changes, things that we thought we would need, we no longer need. or things that we bought for the war, basic navigable kits and that type of stuff, may no longer be needed based on changing environment in the ground. bca changes our forstructure. that's the basic reason. >> so if we are buying so much

stuff and what's going to drive me crazy is when i figure out that what you gave away last year, you bought again this year. let me look at how much you've giving away. i know this is state coordinated, but i want to make sure that we're clear about how out-of-control some of this is. in dr. coburn's state, the pains city sheriff's office has one, full-time sworn officer. one. they've gotten to mrecs since 2011. now, you gave the impression in your testimony that you're at least making the minimum about making sure what you give is in somehow proportional to the size of a force chlts in the lake angela's police department in michigan, you gave them 13 military assault weapons since

2011. they have one, full time, sworn officer. how in the world can anyone say that this program mazz one lick of oversight? >> the rule of thumb is validated by the state coordinator that requested. no more than one. so i'd have to look at the incident in senator coburn's state. and same thing with rifles. i will make part of the record the list.

and that is a long list. we'll need to get to the bottom of that. today's "boston globe." the headline, "day of decision -- primary voters will the curtain on some political dramas and set the stage for more." here to talk about the >> i'm here to talk about a reporter with the boston globe. good morning, joshua miller.

i want to start with the governor's race. is this coming down to be a race between martha cokley and charley baker? or is there going to be a surprise today. >> it's -- it could be a surprise. always think there could be a surprise. but all of the public polling, there's been a huge amount of it here, in massachusetts, has found that martha cokley over for democratic gubernatorial rival. gubernatorial rival. steve grossman, the former dnc medicare the head of and medicaid. so we expect it will be ictorious based on the polls and she will likely face charlie baker, the 2010 republican governor here who lost to patrick in 2010 and a former health insurance company executive in november. we expect to be a very competitive race. host: what are the issues shaping up in that race in the sprint to november? guest: we'll see. baker has a pivot -- so far focused on really sort of

issues of making government work effectively. republican who's quite strongly of gay marriage. legal here in massachusetts for sometime now. on, the he's focused differentiation with democrats, f government will work more effectively under his watch and won't be continual push towards increasing taxes. that's been his message going forward. ee how that shapes up with martha coakley. she's spent a lot of time pushing back to her two primary the framework of the democratic primary and see ow her message, which has focused broadly on economic opportunity for everyone, education and expanding mental opportunities for folks. see how that message changes come tomorrow assuming she wins. host: the political reporter with "the boston globe." talking to him about primary day massachusetts. focus on congress and the key

races always being watched there. this jumped here for re-election in the sixth district. always expected to have a tough general election. but the primary is shaping up to be a tough election for him as well. guest: that's right. it's an extraordinary change -- happened.hat's he -- he beat richard to say a republican, long-time state and former lieutenant by one orial nominee in 2012.e point it was expected they were going to run for a rematch. that was going to be a close race. what's extraordinary is he's had a really tough challenge from ne of his three democratic primary opponents, seth molten, former marine, managed to raise an extraordinary amount of money, beating him in the number of recent quarters and really robust campaign has been airing -- had been airing ads, while some tough essentially painting him as

inineffective. gotten help from outside groups, and we -- there wasn't a lot of -- hasn't been a lot of public polling. any reliable public polling in race. but a sign that was vulnerable >> he starts airing a really bitter ad one week ago today, essentially tieing him to conservative republicans on issues that denitdefinitely pro won't help him. he said molten took money from a special interest group that only funds republicans who voted to out law abortion. tea partiers say they'll end the medicare guarantee. i was watching the patriot's game on sunday and i saw that spot there. it's been erroring heavily in sh hairing heavily in shows that people watch. >> the ninth district, several

republicans looking to take on congressman keating there, democratic congressman keating. how much trouble is he looking in the general election? >> i think he's probably likely to face john chapman of former romney administration official, former official in the administration of governor mitt romney. when he was governor here in massachusetts. the expectation here is bill keating always has a challenge. despite the jie gagigantic hous in 2010, he did manage to win and he's subseque ssequently mat as well. it's an obama-voting district by a relatively comfortable margin. it's the second-most comettive of the house seats based on democratic performance.

he's expect ed to win. we'll see what the ri publy cans look like tonight. there are four republicans running. >> and as we already noted, a lot of the focus on new england in the new hampshire senate race. there is a race in massachusetts, as well. >> yeah, something that people often forget. senator, eddie markey who wanted a relatively comfortable special election victory of last june is on the ballot again. he wanted the race to finish out the term of john kerry.

so e eel see. but he did need -- end up needing help from the democratic senatorial campaign committee to boost him and help him get over the finish line. so the expectedation here is markey will be perfectly fine. but, you know, if that wave grows, we'll definitely see if it puts markey in any kind of danger. but right now, the real federal rates is the one we'll be watching in the federal state here and massachusetts. >> appreciate your time this morning. >> thanks so much for having me.

screeria -- nigeria. - >> with live kov ran of the u.s. house, here on c-span three, we compliment with special affairs events. c-span3 is the home of american history tv. the civil war's 150th anniversary, visiting battlefields and key events. american artifacts touring museums and historic siets to discover what artifacts reveal about america's past. lectures in history delving into america's past.

article kooifl government and educational fills. c-span3 funded by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. wasn wasn't. >> i welcome members of the public for the foreign affairs committee select. this is one of our bian yum meetings. the last took place on the 20th of march. and can i give a warm welcome to our new foreign secretary. we tried a couple of times to get you while you were secretary

of state for defense. can i get half the committee to give you a warm welcome. i hope you've been briefed on the groups of questions. we're going to start with iraq and syria. perhaps you'd like to talk about the possible air war in syria and whether or not you any it's in our national interest to join in it. >> the united states is already carrying out air strikes 234 support of the isle raksecurity devices. the prime minister has made clear that there is not a specific ask, therefore, nothing

for us to consider. it's an salutely clear that air strikes alone, whoever they're delivered by, is not guilty going to be the solution. but it's possible. the air activity koumd with part of a wider package, which involves political initiative and must involve an iraqihead supported operation on the ground. . >> we haven't had arn unspecific

ask, but it's well-understood that the u.s. is looking at developing a policy fr for dealing with isil but will involve a very wide condition. secretary hegel and kerry made it clear this they help for extensive nato support, as well. not necessarily support in delivering kinetic military activity. and secretary can he recall riff made it very clear that he understands the different nations have different appetites.

>> sorry to press you on this, but if asked, this is what we'd like you to do. >> thank you for the clarification. >> i think the united states is well aware that this is a very sensitive subject in this country. and that we will want to look what kind of package and we will want to think very carefully and how we can most effectively contribute to that. what other allies are proposing to do and very carefully, about what position we should take. yesterday, in this kind of situation, clearly, this would be pre-meditated involvementment.

>> if the rev was deployed, was it because they were going to make a strategic position? or would it be more of a political gesture of support than solidarity. >> i think different air forces have different niche capableties. s it's an extremely capable aircraft. >> can i just clarify one point? i've been using the phrase a rock. do you distinguish between ko

and a where for help? >> no, the entity with which we deal is iraq. and it's clear that any 5:00 fifty, whether it's supply of weapons and equipment or in deed, in the future, if it were to be a question of direct military activity, this would alms have to be done at the wrest of government. so if the krg and o-bill asked you for support.

>> can you say how committed they are within two months? and the sunni region, of course. sunni personalities have joimpbed the curdish government. where are we in terms of trieshs and whether they've been at-all involved in bringing art igss together. >> any it's fairly safe to say that it's lerlly days. >> the program has set out, looks like a sensible program. all the right noises are made by

all of the right american people. so we'll have to wait and see. i should also say that the role of the president has been very good. >> they have pushed back the need to build over the agenda perhaps more to the floor a few months ago. in terms of tribes, there's less

buy-in. i think we've aumgs reck nieded that it's goirng to take more than standing up for the sunni tribe that is have alimed themselves to switch back. they're going to need to see a sustarianed out reach h reach. their ideas were ignored. presumabl presumably, would it be condition until on the body demonstrating.

>> this can only work if there's incredible security forces on the ground. if there isn't, there isn't a sensibible sper vengs. just sort of moving onto the position 06 iran and assets. >> would the u.k. government under any circumstances fauk to

asad or iran to influence what happens over the operation. against ice lean in syria. >> and as you know, we're in the process of reestablishing an em by sill. the situation with the asaad reneem j very different.

>> i'm sure the iranians will hear. just a question, mid fellow chairman. is it u.k.policey. or would containment of the structure be on the table. >> i'm glad you've asked me that request. i heard the u.s. secretary of state saying very careerly on friday, and it's my view, as well. there is no compromise. there is no contain. strad jill. there is no can-existence with an isis. . it has to be to crush it, to cult it off from sources of su.

and to see it wipe out. >> thank you very much. one has to take om isis in syria. do you 5:00 sechlt that there's a much higher risk intervening militarily in the west point of view than there is in the more limited objective. it's zuch a fast-moving, fluid situation. you've seen this place that morald into the shadows. >> yes u i agree with that. i think while the strategies

aumgs audiocassette about the need to see it as a single theater. >> we need a regional code to take on isis. the idea that you can just defeat isis from the air is not kbood. it needs truth on the ground. it should be westin troops. but what exactly should be the

military role of this coalition, the regional coalition chlgt can you add a little more flesh? frustratings is where you know thick, but actually defining the sex tebt r tent is yiet another. >> of course, we can silt here a in this room and postulate all sorts of con kigszs. there might be muslim countries willing to cricket. some level oaf dpround forces.

>> name? which would be more directly engaged. >> who is the foreign office going to do? many of the additional allies with the facilitating rise of militias in iraq and seesh ya. what is the pharmacist going to do about this? i think we're very clear with our allies.

there is no tolerance now for any candy associated with it. and i'm comfortable that the countries that we're in dialogue with are now clear and we will look to them to work with the city implementing to make sure that financial players to isil are kapoof. having said that, isil is now on organization cig nif can't whole.

>> if one rooks at the name of the state, they have the biggest interests of anybody. so, for example, saudi arabia has made it league. not just to be a member, bru to fund them. i think there may be a distinction between governments in the past has have cleared. individuals that have nothing do

do with governors. okay. one of the main concerns is to make sure that all of that is clearly tar getted. >> do you think there is a jeb rear leak? >> you saw jintsd abds the uaa krukts stripes in liable ya. i mean, how far is this going to go? >> prapgs bad tension for them. they said something last week, they arrested 129 members of the cell. equally, we understand that there is -- that not every organization in the region which has an as lammist tendency.

>> i was very unclear over the last few weeks. it seemed to me a lot of responsibility was being put on. we continuely tuck bt that car as if it's going to solve the who will problem. yorng they could solve the whole problem. what they're doing is holding the line against an isil attack

on they're homeland. and doing it with great passion and conviction, as you would expect. id still have many other targets. >> they're in conflict with other groups. the pesche merger happened to be in the front. and it was the kurds who were holding the lines against isil. >> so the al ms have gone like that, first.

>> is it e squall institution? >> that's correct. as i understand it, the ship 789s that have mad r made so far has gone in to bag dak for election. >> he then moved onto an air craft. we are techted to make sure that the distribution of the supplies broadly spread to mind different groups to avoid any suggestion. that there's any favoritism between groups.

there was a report that suggested that the fight wasn't over. they said suddenly, there was nowhere to move. >> was that accurate? and do we know precisely the state of play is now? >> i think it was accurate. this situation is hard to digest in the meet of the moment. a worse-case scenario, where we thought very large numbers of people out frond told the alley.

numbers of people were getting themselves off the mountain. and the irn volvementment of forces in rescuing groups of people. particularly so much cyran krerks urtis courses. >> it became clear, the lights were on in the presence -- there were fast more in nuchl beryl than we thought. the best way of getting them off is to reinforce the land roots that have already been established. there's nobody there who doesn't want people to go there. there are koft that the people knew what to move off the mountain. kam burks uu.

will 140u8d also remember significant numbers of people in that region. >> they remain displaced. it's a major humanitarian problem for the whole area. >> now, the groups of pesch america, from syria, from turkey also are unassisted. it inkwluded the pkk which is still a prescribed terrorist organizization in this country. and they're obviously a key to continuing the fight against isis.

are we going to deprescribe the quarter? >> that would be a matter fr the home secretary to consider. and she will cogop so obama the basis of the oeft. it is r it is not the case because the terrorist organization karl ris out an act of humanitariannessness. >> will you, yourself, be making a recommendation?

>> if she does, i will give her one. clearly, the persecution of christians, turkeyman and so on in iraq continues. what should the swer national sbesh national community do? it's the root cause of this problem in a land where they have lived together in relative harmony for hundreds and hundred dollar dreads, if not thousands, of years.

we must also support the numbers of four tis placed people. that's a short-term conclusion. >> can i particularly ask you about women? i've raised it on the floor a numb bler of beryl of times in the past few weeks. we have that conference in london that talked about the way that women are very often treated in war conditions.

and many of them were captured. some were sold goo slavery and into the proth els of the middle east. >> are we trying to find them. now we're talking about 3,000 aadulthood women. what has happened to thoiz? >> i can't answer the question what has happen today them. this is not just casual abuse which is what sometimes handed.

this is ideal ojically planned. and that's what makes it particularly shocking. i'm not aware of any operation that's currently going onto track around seek to identify the location of these women. that would probably very difficult to do. there are a million or more. system. >> is this not something special forces can do? >> it would be a very, very difficult shot.

they will be dispursed. this is a law enforcement attack. it's not skills that we've particularly been held in special forces either in the u.k. or elsewhere. >> john roberts. >> turn straight big for you, too. practical measures of combatting on the ground. first of august, we've threatened our way behind the curds in frontline in iraq. has the foreign office given consideration to assisting the kurds? >> i don't think we're doing anything directly with the kurds, do you know? >> we will be talking to the -- that political representatives. in fact, tomorrow.

>> a number of measures have been deduced in iran. is it not the iraqi army itself not bringing something like 250,000 men, which has been poorly structured. it needs to be addressed. but that is the answer. when it comes to ground forces in northern iraq, give us your view of that. but perhaps a time scale is when

you expect an army to be licked into shape. >> i think the distinction is that the merger security forces are demoralize ds. it's very badly structured but well equipped with american weaponry. that's why there hasn't been instruction about the american security forces. i think we see this. and i think the group of country shares this view as a process that has to be taken step-by-step. sfep one is the creation of an inclusive, incredible iraqi government in baghdad, which begins immediately to reach out to the kurdish and the sunni

communities within iraq with a program that recognizes the long standing tensions about sharing of resources and levels of autonomy. as soon as that is in place, we need to see a program of support for restructuring is countries in the region to provide in the short term some of that hands-on training and technical advice. >> very briefly, can i suggest,

you're absolutely right. it's got to be a political solution in the end. but the way you word it, it sounds to me that the timetable is the politics first and the army second. and one can understand that, to a certain extent. but that's how many months before we actually get the iraqi army to address these extremists. am i right? >> i don't think so. the announcement that an iraqi government has been formed so that we can put together an institution including the iraqi security forces. clearly, there's an implicit bargain here that if countries in the region, countries in the west, put packages of support for this government together, they will be doing it ochb the basis of the program that the

government has publicly set down. and if that proves not guilty to be delivered, that would be a major set back. simply retraining, restructuring iraqi security forces while leaving the grooempbss of the,unni population addressed is not a form of successful pushing back of isil. >> thank you. >>. >> a number of commentators have spoken about a more decentralized iraq. do you envision that happening at all? is it plan b? >> i mean, it's not -- well, i'm sorry, i thought you were asking me whether it was plan a. as i read the program, it clearly is a significant degree

of decentralization within the territory of iraq. and a sharing of revenues in a way that addresses some of the underlying grievances. it is not for us to define the government structures in iraq. that has to be something that the people of iraq has to do. our advice would be that unless they are able to do that, in a way which has broad-base d acros all the communities in iraq and much more difficult to overcome the insurgency that it's facing from isil. >> thank you. >> secretary, a few minutes ago, you referred to shipments we

have made to the kurdistan region. particularly, that was by other countries. -- >> well, we've made -- so far, we've made nonlethal shipments of our own equipment. and we've also made shipments of our munitions supplied by albania. >> yesterday the prime minister told me during his statement that the government was now prepared to directly supply weaponry itself as opposed to from other countries. can you tell us when that is going to start, and what kind of weaponry that's likely to be? >> i can tell you that the defense secretary has, today, laid a departmental minute of the military equipment to the government of iraq, including the kurdish regional government, the initial package is scheduled

to arrive in iraq tomorrow. and there will be machine guns and ammunition with a value of about $2 million delivered. >> that's going to go to the kyrgyzstan region? >> that's going to go to the kyrgyzstan region. >> can we move on to russia. since last week, russia has chosen the role of pariah, rather than partner, and it rejected the efforts to draw themselves into the rules-based international system. does that have any impact on our diplomatic approach to russia? >> i don't personally believe in dissenting. i think it's very clear that russia has had the option of being in a partnership relationship with the west. indeed, that's been our strong

preference and desire for the last 20 -- nearly 25 years since the end of the cold war, to draw russia into the community of nations, to have a partnership with russia, recognizing that we won't agree on everything. and we have strategic differences. but we -- we are in a sincere belief that we are able to work constructively together as partners. russia has shown by its actions that it rejects that notion of partnership. and i chose the word pariah quite deliberately. we have a long established relationship in europe, on changing the boundaries of nation states by force of art. that's not the way we do things. russia has shown itself completely oblivious to that established convention, rule, n and willing to use force to

pursue what it sees as its immediate short-term interests in a way that is rejected by, i believe, every other state in europe. >> thank you. the gentleman? >> the chronology of russian are territorial grandizements, it carried out the annexation of mal dove a. and georgia. that was followed by the annexation of crimea in ukraine. do you agree that the territorial objective of mr. putin now is to carry out a further territorial annexation de facto of the eastern part of ukraine? >> i don't think we know that. i don't think there's any evidence that that is the plan. there's plenty of speculation about this.

but i think it is probably the case that mr. putin will have expected a stronger popular rising in support of the separatist movement than actually occurred in the donetsk region. when the events began to unfold. and i don't think we know enough to say whether his current strategy and visages are annexation or not. certainly, the words of the most recent agreement would point strongly away from that outcome. >> leaving aside for the moment as to how you judge what is the territorial objective now of the russian government in ukraine, how do you respond to the criticism that has been made

that the british government has done nothing like enough, and indeed the american government, and indeed other governments have done nothing like enough to bring home to mr. putin that the continuation of military de facto annexation, violating the boundaries of sovereign states is both unacceptable, and also relevant of the most extreme dangers? and to bring home to mr. putin that if he thinks he can carry out a similar de facto annexation, or possibly the whole of the territories of one or more of the baltic states, he could precipitate the horrors of a world war iii? >> well, i don't have to respond to criticism of the united

states, or any other country, but i'll respond to criticism of the uk government. i think we have responded in a measured and sensible way to an outrageous provocation. we've stood by the people of the ukraine. we have been at the forefront of the implementation of measures within the european union, within nato, to provide reassurance to the eastern member states of nato, and to impose economic sanctions on russia. i think these measures are more effective for having been imposed by the whole of the european union, and in the case of the reassurance measures, having been delivered and supported by the whole of nato,

than they would have been if we'd taken within europe a series of bilateral actions. but acting 28 means that we have to be pragmatic about how fast and how far we can go. we have to take everybody with us. my judgment is that the level of response that we've delivered, delivered at 28 in both nato and the eu, is sending an effective message, and it's delivering a far more effective message than would have been delivered by perhaps a stronger response, but delivered only bilaterally. >> can i ask your assessment as to whether we've got the right -- or have had the right balance in our dealings with russia? i think we would all agree it would be good to stand up to the

bully on the playground. and belatedly our allies are waking up to that fact. we could argue that sometimes we ourselves are traded cheaply when dealing with russia. for example, perhaps not leaning enough on them when it comes to russia's intimidation on georgia, in the hope that we could secure their sort of allegiance, or help when it came to iran. what's your take on that going forward? what lessons do you think we can learn? >> well, the first and most obvious lesson is, it's a wonderful thing, and we can now all perhaps wonder if we were being naive of the type of relationship we could have with putin and russia. i do think we need to distinguish different things here. there are areas where self-interest means that russia

will continue to work cooperatively with the west, where we have an alignment of interest in relation to third countries, or problems in other parts of the world, where i would expect whatever the difficulties that we have, we will continue to pursue a course of action which is in our mutual best interests. and with the benefit of possibly saying perhaps we should have woken up to what's going on -- what now appears to be going on earlier in the process. perhaps we should have paid more attention to mr. putin's rhetoric around the collapse of the union being the greatest disaster of 20th century history. perhaps we should have all read his doctoral thesis a little more closely where he sets out his view that energy, politics

can be a lever of state power. but all of these are with the benefit of hindsight. what we've spent much of the last 25 years doing is genuinely and sincerely trying to draw russia by stages into the international community. and i think at one stage, we all felt that that was being pretty successful, that russia was becoming normalized, if you like, learning to play by the rules, becoming increasingly engaged in the international economy. and increasingly, a country we could do business with. now, i think we should also emphasize that we have no dispute with the russian people. when you and i were growing up, the russian people were a mystery to us. now, you know, everybody knows plenty of russian people that live in london, across europe, people visit russia, do business in russia. it's no longer the great mystery it was. and weav