after trying to get things done? should they not have been doing this from the very beginning? host: next up is lakeland, fla. on the independent line. caller: [unintelligible] he just chuck it out and get it out of there and we would not have this problem. host: i remind you to turn down your television or radio. decatur, ga. caller: thank you for taking my call. i think it is unfortunate that we have not been prepared for this war on terror in terms of our poor educational system, and how it failed to educate us about other cultures and even -- and even other -- -- other religions. we have a serious deficit in turn of the positive.

. host: the president looking for recommendations as early as the next couple of days. this is jill on our republican line. caller: if you had janet napolitano as your governor you

would know how scary it is that she is the head of this agency. host: what specifically concerns you? caller: i don't know what her experiences. she left arizona and mississippi. she could care less about any laws that were passed -- she left arizona in a mess. how could we tell these other countries to secure their borders when she will not secure hours? the other thing is, they're really upset me. i was watching "meet the press," on sunday, and the former -- who was president bush's former head of the same agency? host: secretary chertoff. caller: and later on it came on on another news thing, he is trying to push for a big plan so they will take over some company he started.

i am starting to say, what is wrong with our country that these guys are so worried about lining the pockets of their pants that they cannot stand to protect the american people? president is in charge of -- protecting america. this health care thing, transparency, i give mr.. lamb credit for sending that letter today. you tell me which party is protecting our country. i would love to support that person. host: get caller mentioned a letter sent by c-span requesting our cameras in future negotiations on health care legislation. you can read that letter online at c-span.org. regarding possible changes in the wake of flight to 253 bombing, the president is

standing by his two directors, leon panetta, and the director of national intelligence. california. go ahead. caller: we need to look at the end product of the philosophy. it is a risk where you decide who can come into your country and everybody else is excluded. that is the only way we will truly be said. host: we will have more calls tomorrow morning on "washington journal", and you will have a chance to see the president's comments spurred we will show them again at 8:00 p.m. eastern, here on c-span. the house was in session today, the start of the second session. no real business today. that will resume all week from today on january 12. live coverage of the house on c- span. the senate comes back by january 20. that on c-span to. -2.

the british house of commons has come back from their break. gordon brown taking questions, that is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern. we spoke to an expert on al qaeda and yemen about the presence of al qaeda in that country and what is ahead. here is a look. host: richard fontaine joins us from the center for new american securities to talk to us about al qaeda in yemen. good morning and welcome to the program. guest: morning. host: in the financial times this morning as well as in other papers they are talking about al qaeda seemingly making a haven or seeking to make yemen a safe haven. why is this so attractive for them to be there? >> well, there's several reasons, first is the inability of the central government to extend its control over the country, and there's been a lot of turmoil the country is

facing, not north and separatist movement in the south diminishing their natural resources and 10th government resources devoted to the fight is going down. there's also the geographic location of yemen. on the southern portion of saudi arabia. makes it attractive. trying to launch attacks into saudi arabia. so putting all that together makes it attractive. >> how much opposition has the government of yemen tried to put up to root out al qaeda and work with other countrys to put al qaeda out of business altogether? >> well, it's been on and off.ñi following the 9/11 attacks then 2003 and 2004. went a long way. there was a sense that al qaeda was defeat indeed yemen but then in 2006 there was a major

prison break which helped to reconstitute the organization. sips that time the government has been mostly focused on the security threats that it deems central athletes its own internal ability to govern the country, and that is the separatist momentum in the south and insurgence as i in the north. so it's will to deal with al qaeda until recently has been quite limited. >> you've got an op-ed under the headline yemen's coming disaster. they are set to run out of oil in 2017 but yemen hasn't planned for the post riden population's past-oil future. >> guest: that's very much a part of it. a very large percentage of the population is below the age of 15.

the po population which is already pourous in the arab world is expected to double in the coming years. and as you just said, the oil revenue that the government gets makes up perhaps 80% of the spire budget of the central government of yemen. and when in less than 10 years all of the oil is expected to run out in yemen, and there is no plan for what to do next to make up for that revenue. host: we're talking with richard fontaine with the center for new american security in yemen. if you want to get involved until our conversation, you can call the democrats line or republicans line or independents' line. you can also send us an email or twitter, if you've called in the last 30 days today would be the day to do that as well. you also say in your op-ed that

it's just one of the threats. the deteriorating situation in yemen poses to u.s. interests, what's the other? >> one is the instrumental instability in the kin. with the insurgence as i in the north, the presence of al qaeda, limited government resources, the challenge the government will have both in terms of population, diminishing public resources because of the decline in revenues, it's sort of the perfect storm for instability across the country. that makes ate nice safe haven for terrorists. but beyond that it also suggests the possibility that yemen will break up or become a truly failed state and export the instability northward into saudi arabia or eastward into yemen or become a safe haven

for piratesñi because somalia i just across the way. the threats go beyond the terrorism. host: our first call comes from florida, tony on our line for republicans, you're on the "washington journal." caller: hi. i'm just a -- sorry. ok. yes. i'm justçóñr curious about spea about yemen. yemen has always been a safe haven for some terrorist groups. i mean, i've known this when i was in the army. now all of a sudening we're putting yemen on the map. i'm wondering why we haven't done anything years ago in doing what we should have been doing a few years ago. guest: well, that's not a bad point. >> as i mentioned before guest: in late 2001 and 2002 and 2003 there was great focus by the united states on the

problems of terrorism and in giving assistance to the government of yemen and following 2003 when there was a sense that al qaeda had been defeat indeed yemen, much of that dropped off. the amount 06 attention, the amount of resources that we gave to yemen dropped off significantly. and since 2006, with the reconstitution of al qaeda in yemen, only platedly has the united states sort of focused again on the problem there and of course the reason why we're talking about it this morning is because omar farooq aomar that took took omar farooq kathwari was coming from yemen. caller: my question is how long have we been with this war

against yemen? i mean, i don't mean to go to a conspiracy theory but i read in ha general petraeus and another went down there so when tough head of arms services committee go to yemen, they are not just going to see if it's -- >> well, i wouldn't characterize it at all as a war in yemen. and senator mccain is my former boss. i worked for him for 5 1/2 years on foreign policy and so i can state categorically what was on his mind and our minds in that visit was not a war against yemen but rather an attempt to try to get a better sense of the challenges that face the country and what was going on there, and how the united states might inject its policies toward yemen in light of it. host: tell us about that trip. and is that a reason to be

concerned that we may eventually see u.s. troops in yes, ma'am snn guest: i think you will see an increase in u.s. advisory capacity and security assistance. thoose already been announcements that the u.s. will double security to yemen from around $70 million and the visit by general petraeus and john brennan the top offensive coordinator in the white house, i believe have been focused not on deploying his own american troops about ways in which she might assist the services if their fight against al qaeda. host: next up algiers, alex. go ahead. caller: i'd like to submit that the motivations for this are not so much terrorism as the $5 bhl to i.m. sfment and has

loaned since september of this past year, to yemen. the unrest in yemen, if the people there that have been under the suppression of the tyrannical government and core government there for the past four decades succeed in overthrowing the government, i.m.f. is going to be on the hunt for that $5 billion. now the anomaly is in the highjacking itself. one, i hear no main stream media bringing up the united host: i hear no mainstream media talking about those who helped the man gets on the plane. there are others that filled the accused for the entire flight. there is no mention of this and a mainstream medium or the fbi. then there was a man that was

detained after the flight landed. there were two people arrested. the fbi lied about that and changed their story five times since. out of the blue now, we have this man, this accuse, coming from yemen. the son of the wealthiest -- he is the banker there, in one of the most corrupt countries in the world. he did not so much ago, my speculation is, he did not go there to warn. he was there to go ahead and sacrifice his son had to go ahead -- i knowç this sounds le a conspiracy, but it sounds more plausible because i do not see any coverage from the mainstream media on this, to sacrifice his son to go ahead and get in on the fact that we are going out into terrorists. we are terrorists. host: we will leave it there.

>> i have not seen or heard of any evidence that would suggest that this alleged terrorists, father was attempting to sacrifice his son. on the contrary, she was warning the united states government -- he was warning the united states government about his son's possible involvement in islamist extremism. >> the idea that the imf is some somehow ar tick late its reasons for carrying out specific attacks. >> and if there was one that referenced the i.m.f. attack, i guess i missed it. host: secretary of state clinton, we'll hear what she has to say. >> obviously we see global implications from the war in yemen and the ongoingxd efforts by al qaeda in yemen to use it as a base for terrorist attacks

far beyond the region. soñr we are going to listen and consult with those who have longhorns experience in yemen, such as his majesty and excellence cri and others, and work together to try to encourage the government take steps that will lead to a more lasting period of peace and stability. >> as his excellence as i has said, there's been numerous conflict ins yemen and seem to get worse and worse with more players involved, and it's time for the international community to make it clear to yemen that their expectations and conditions are continuing support for the government so that they can take actions that will have a better chance to provide the peace and stability to the people of yemen and the region. host: your comments?

guest: i think that's right. there's a global threat we can still focused on yemen and guest: and we now know the ambitions are beyond that and include the american homeland. the one thing i will add is it's important that u.s. policy be focused not only on counterterrorism, that's obviously a very crucial element. but security assistance and security operations alone are not going to solve the problems that yemen has. in order to mitigate some of the immediate yare and long-term problems it has, it's going to eninclude development, aid, dip plome as i in an attempt to eliminate the conflict in the north and as

well as pressure on the government sproff its governance and human rights practices. host: reporting the u.s. beached re-opened today after a two-day closure, the ambassador says counterterrorism operations have allowed the security situation in the capital has always been under to -- guest: i don't think that the security situation in the capital has always been under control. as an anecdotal piece of evidence, when i traveled there in august, we walked around the old city of sana and were under heavy military simply because the security situation is not what everyone would hope it would be. the ambassador personnel are under some fairly tough

restrictions in terms of where they can go and that sort of thing. the ambassador did reopen and that was atributed to military operations that the government carried out in the last several days against the suspected al qaeda members and the government at least seems to believe that that got rid of the threat, the direction of the u.s. ambassador. but i point out the ambassador, itself, was bombed in 2008 and there's been credible threats against the ambassador of the united kingdom, france, japan, germany, so i think there's probably a long way to go in terms of the security situation. host: next up bonita springs, florida, welcome to the "washington journal." caller: well, thank you, very much. you know, 50eu6 been listening a lot about the te)orists, but my question is why are we focused so much on the the terrorists come in and there's no change.

9-1 1 would have been avoided that had officer been trained. and when he was stopped on the way to the airport, because he had no authorization to detain them, let them go to the airport. it's a owner in fact that less than 60 townies in our country have officers that are trained in 287-g. so my question is there's a lot of terrorists coming into our country over the borders. but i guess at the risk of -- >> mark, what is 2787 g? >> that's the immigration that counters with the flafere has -- to do that yet if they do they come in on a plane that they want to sneak in on the country and there's no way officers can even pull them over if they appear to be having illegal status in our

country. guest: host: we'll leave it there. guest: well, this particular bomber, did have a advicea to spr the united states and was able to be on a plane. so i'm not sure what the caller identifies as a possible seclusion that applies in this case. host: daniel on our line for democrats. go ahead. caller: may i start by saying i wish i had your haberdasher, i wish i could afford your haberdasher, because you address meticulously and quite often you have a very presentable clothing. i particularly liked your orange tie the other day, but beyond all that, this whole business, or not business per se, but it just represents a fact that we've got a bunch of bureaucrats running arnled, stealing taxpayers' dollars,

they are and they are totally incompetent. this one that went from lawless nigeria to detroit, i mean, he had a red flag like a -- well, anyways, i'm really frustrate that had that situation even developed as far as it did, and thank goodness no one was injured, but i'll leave it like that. host: you mean richard fontaine in this morning's washington post, this headline, yepen walked a fine line and a pure backlash where many align with al qaeda, what kind of tenuous situation is the government in over there as far as trying to appear independent while supporting neweth guest: well, that is the fine line they are trying to walk, and they've been through this experience before.

in 2002 a u.s. drone strike took out an al qaeda operative along with several other individuals, and the united states took credit for the killing of these al qaeda operatives in 2002. that put the government of yes, ma'am engine a difficult place ethically because there was backlash against the president and rest of the government for working closely with the united states to carry this out. so what the president tapped government are trying to do is work quietly with the united states, particularly because of the new pressure they were coming under. since the attempted bombing. but at the same time not look to their own people like they are somehow in the pocket of the united states. host: back to the phones. arlene, for the independents go ahead. caller: hi. happy new year to everyone. i just have a quick comment and

the thing to do is just close up the borders. it doesn't have to be on a permanent basis. let's just do it. quite frankly i'm tired of all this talk about transparency and the money being forwarded to these other countries. our country is in the toilet. we got to take care of what we have first before we go worrying about iraq, iran, afghanistan, we've been supporting germany and vietnam since the war. now we got billions and billions of dollars going out of this country to asia and other nation. we need to stop this. this country needs to take care of this country first. we pay people millions of dollars, congressmen, senators, millions not to farm their land. i can't afford to go buy an acre of land because it's priced out of my realm and we're paying people not to farm when we've got people starving in this country.

there's something wrong with this picture. host: eh, we're kind of going off the rail there. how much money are we sending to yes, ma'am snn >> for 2009 it was about $70 million. and i believe that the figure for development was something on the order of $30 million. boat of those will be pushed up sfaptly in 2010. there's been some talk of tripling the clip to $100 million and doubleing the security assistance to perhaps $140 million. but i think it's also important to note that while the figures are significantly higher than they were before, they are going from a low level over the past several years and compared to what we spend on a weekly basis in iraq and afghanistan there's almost a rounding there. host: what do you mean are there any strippings attached to the money we send other

there? guest: well some depose to the anti-corruption agency to help with the corruption problem to building hospitals, to developing projects around the country and that sort of thing. i'm not aware of any publicly explicit conditions put on the assistance but the there's always with these things a sort of an understanding with the government about how theseñr projects will go forward and how these moneys will be used and how we will go forward to increase or cease. host:ñi you're on the "washingt journal" with mr. fontaine. caller: israel didn't exist, this war is all about israel. all we're doing is fighting wars in the middle east for israel. if this didn't exist we would want have goten attacked on 9-11 and have our first amendment rights taken away.

host: mary, i don't really anybody on the flane went in the towers being from israel. caller: um, they are not fro israel but that's why we're getting attacked is because of our support. guest: if you look at why the ar ticklated reasons are for -- for example, al qaeda and yemen carrying out attacks in yemen or the attack in the united states, i don't think you'll see israel much anywhere as the reason. they stateed the reasons being the humiliation of islam or for u.s. actions around the world or the yemeni government so, it's very difficult for me to see the attachment between al qaeda and israel. host: don, go ahead. caller: yes. i wanted to thank c-span. mr. fontaine, i heard the

government was reving up about the talks of yemen. lope and behold christmas day that guy was allowed to be on that plane. if it wasn't for american passengers stopping him, he would have gone through with his plan. another thing is all i see every time this goes on, we get moore rules against and the bottom line is do you believe in the u.s. constitution and bill of rights because all i see is the moral stripping of see is the moral stripping of our rights and bottom line this guest: well, i guess one of the points that i might extract from that callt( this the sort that increasing, the recall of facts that these terrorist attacks of on the ability of americans, particularly in the air travel, those who travel frequently know

how rigorous the security checks have then. in that sense, it is important to look at these attempted attacks, not only targeted for having an effect directly on those that it might harm, but also the ripple effects it has throughout the rest of our society. host: our last call comes from fort meade, florida. on our line for independence. caller: good morning. first of all, you have a good show here today. let me ask him this question. the comment i wanted to make, and that this, we, as americans, we tend to think we can police the world. in the muslim countries where you see continuous growth of the al qaeda movement, this is where you see that people are disenfranchised. basically, 90% of these cases,

the american policies have not included in what the indigenous people really are -- in example, these are muslim countries. when we tried to impose a western style of government or style of living in there, it really and truly disrupts this movement and it gives them the ability to grow against what we believed in or the way we live in america. we must take into consideration when our policies are set, that these are muslim people and islam -- naturally. it's not something that's been imposed or can be preached to them. and their values will diminish by western culture. i would like really and truly for your guests to answer as to whether or not he has seen or if they are winds going change

guest: i think there's a deterioration and also a connection between the govern nance and lack of govern nance in places like yemen and the degree of disaffection amongst the population, those temperatures they see not to be a source of our problem and other maps. the relationship the united states has with yemen has to be based on more than simply counterterrorism. not because we want to impose our own vision of what american-style government is in yemen but because of the -- it seems clearly that the source of the disaffection and sympathy characterized in other parts of the country. host: richard fontaine has been our guest from the center for a

newñi amerin >> you can see president obama's, airlineçó security and reaction to the attempted christmas day attack tonight at 8:00 eastern, it here on c-span. the house started the second session today. business was very short period. . the senate continuous -- they planned to consider a traditionalxd nomination. see the senate live on cspan-2. the british house of commons returned from its break this week. we will have live coverage when prime minister george -- gordon brown takes questions from members of parliament. live tomorrow morning at 7:00

a.m. eastern. in the next week, british airports will introduce a new bomb detection equipment and body scanning equipment. the foreign secretary also addressed members and the house of commons on the closure of the u.k. embassy in yemen. this is 70 minutes. >> or to question. -- urgent question. the foreign secretary, and urgent question, namely, that he will make a statement about the situation in yemen, including the closure of the british embassy and the position of british citizens in yemen. >> i will address the broader picture. the government has been concerned about the situation in

yemen and the number and scale of challenges faced by their government and people. increasing insecurity and instability and yemen opposed a threat to the gulf region, to the wider middle east and to the u.k. over the last 18 months, the situation is of growing concern to her majesty's government. it includes working with international partners. in september, 2009, a development of a renewed country strategy for yemen. this is -- this is currently being implemented. it covers four areas. support for democratic political structures. addressing the causes of conflict thirdly, building yemeni ability to tackle security issues. and helping the government to deliver the functions of the state onshore and offshore. to further strengthen the support for the government of yemen, the prime minister announced on january 1 that the

u.k. will host a high-level meeting later this month. the meeting will focus on galvanizing international support for devin's fight against terrorism and coordinating assistance to address the economic and social factors underlying extremism. mr. speaker, the symbol of the government's long-term commitment to yemen -- they signed a 10-year partnership arrangement with the government of yemen in august, 2007. the u.k. development fund is fully allied to our yemen strategy and to the priorities of the national reform agenda. we will spend 25 million pounds in fiscal year 2010, and depending on progress of reform of states in yemen, up to 50 million pounds in 2012. the government of yemen is embattled on four fronts. first, the troubled rebellion in the north. separatist movements in the

south. economic decline across the country, particularly important in the context of -- the population of yemen as foreseen in the near future. also, the growing threat from islamist terrorism in the form of al qaeda at, which finds safekeeping in -- safe haven ad yemen. it detracts from the government's short-term efforts to address these priorities. as a result of security concerns, the british embassy closed early this week on a precautionary basis for two days. the embassy is now open and staff is back at work. the public services section, the set and consular section, are closed. this is under regular review. i discussed it with our ambassador yesterday morning. it is not unusual for embassies to close during times of heightened tension. in 2009, the british embassy closed in the capital city on over a dozen occasions.

it would not be right to comment on the specifics of this closure, but i do assure the house is kept under regular review to ensure services are maintained. the embassy maintains regular contact with the british community, and with a british nationals who are registered with the embassy. the overall threat level in yemen has not changed. as we made clear and the travel advisory, the threat from terrorism is high and remains of concern. we continue to recommend against all non-essential travel to the country. >> i refer the house to register. my personal interests, having been born and yemen and lived there for nine years, in welcoming the london conference, will the foreign secretary state precisely what additional support has been given to yemen as a result of this recent initiative? can you also confirm that all the money pledged to yemen in november, 2006, in london, has

been paid over. can we stop referring to yemen as a failed state? çit has the capacity toç failf britain, america and the arab states do not support it. could we make sure that the foreign secretary visits this country as soon as possible? >> mr. speaker, three parts. first of all, the london meeting will not be a conference. i do not think what is -- that is what is needed. some 5 billion pounds was pledged at the london conference and 2006. a small portion of that has been ini] part,ç because of concerns about how the money would be spent. there are other issues raised. 40 percent of it has been assigned an 81% allocated -- a small percentage has actually been spent. in terms of his attempt to send me to yemen, i cannot quite

promise them that. my hon. friend, the minister of --u! will be on ça wrecky toçn çnext month. the conclusions of the london çmeeting in inappropriate way. >> mr. speaker, may we welcome on behalf of the opposition, the calling of the conference in london on january 28. agreed that yemen as a fragile state, rather than a failed state. it matters to british security. thereo7k are three setsç of questions. on the closure ofçç the embas, is the confidentç that the rigt level of consular support can be given to british citizens and officialsç in yemen? in the event of further closures of our embassy, and plans are in place to offer them protection?

for u.s.-u.k. support of the counter terrorist police force, and a yemeni coast card operation, -- ç[unintelligible] çóbut specifically, does this refer purely to financial support? or to any actual assistance on the ground in the form of trading? what is the timescale for the delivery of this support, and when is that you knew it expects to be up and running? -- the new unit expect to be up and running? on the part of other gulf nations that may be willing to work with us on this initiative. third they, at yemen cannot be viewed solely through the prism of an al qaeda problem. the foreign secretary refers to a mixture of issues. çit is an internal conflicts, fuelled by political grievances, poverty, corruption, competition

over depleted natural resources, and requires political leadership from the government as well as international assistance these issues -- can he assure us that these issues will all be addressed at the conference in january and will continue to be treated as a priority by his colleagues? will it also focus on the dam and the government's responsibility -- the yemeni's government's responsibility? >> i am confident that the right procedures areç being followedn terms of consular support for british nationals. the yemeni çdiaspora and britan as long standing -- in britain is longstanding. çthere is some need for customr support, but i am assured by the ambassador that is being taken care of and the appropriate way.

çspecifically, toward network, which operates in many countries, -- the warden network, has not been met so notified. in respect to the work goilg on with the yemeni authorities, money for training, which is the important part of the cooperation taking place -- we will be discussing with a range of the attendees at the london meeting whether or not there is a way in which they could support the u.k.-u.s. efforts. and we will look for a purported ways in which to use the skills andç expertise that come from other countries. mr. speaker, i was glad to hear what the right hon. gentleman said about the threat of the british program there and then need to maintain it. the short, medium and long-term are related. most of the grievances that exist in yemen are of local nature, not of global jihad.

xd-- where al qaeda can try to find it reads there, the vast bulk of the issues -- çwhile al qaeda can find roots there, the vast bulk of the issues are the ones that the government can address. it is the prime responsibility of debt and to do so. >> the actions of the foreign officer in closing the embassy enjoys support across the house. will the foreign secretary reassure the house that in supporting action against al qaeda in yemen, we are insuring that local people are not inadvertently alienated by our actions and those by our allies? in giving it ministry support and aid to the yemenis, and the strategy you talked about, are we impressing upon the government the importance of avoiding civilian debt and building a sustainable coalition against al qaeda across the

whole country? >> the hon. gentleman makes an extremely good and important point, and a highly relevant one. there has been a very wide welcome across the gulf, and within yemen, for the fact that the london meeting will not simply focus on counter- terrorism. that might play into the dangers that the hon. gentleman is referring to. the into this that is al qaeda of the arabian peninsula -- tghe xdhe incubus of al qaeda in the arabian peninsula should not become a rallying point. they become the victims. he is absolutely right to insist that the economic, social and political issues that are at the heart of yemen's development do need to be addressed. i think that yemen's oil wealth is likely to run out in 2015. the dangers of water scarcity are very real.

these are issues that are not amenable to counter-terrorism solutions. they require a much more deep- seeded and -- that is why the fourth priority we mentioned of the function of the state is so important to these questions. >> the foreign secretary mentioned the radicalization. we undertake a very close talks with the saudi arabian government, which makes some of the westernized countries seem unorthodox. some of these contacts seem to be working and i think we need to learn from that. >> the saudi arabian program that was featured today it was one that i visited last year in saudi arabia. there is a counter radicalization program. it is extremely innovative. i met my self a failed suicide bomber, one who had been inveigled into driving a truck

-- and failed. it is not a laughing matter, since he killed a lot of people in that truckee was driving. he did not know what the contents war. she was going to the program. there were a number of other people going to the$ogram -- he was going to the program, qincludingç religious instruct. there are larger, innovative profuqmeáqáurns -- in regards to return to normal life after the program. i congratulate the saudi arabian government in this program. >> mr. speaker, can i declare an interest -- i visited yemen a couple years ago. i found a very impressive foreign minister read things britain has a key role to play in that country. what i also found is that the electoral gains made by radical islamists have been in those

areas of the greatest party. what we need -- can we also do more to eradicate and rehabilitate their breeding grounds? >> sorry to sound like a stuck record, but the hon. gentleman makes an important point. those who in çthe newspapers today are alleging we are çwasting ourç money and spendg development money and anti- party messageñr --w3 programs. they are actually wrong. çççthe fact thatç they enjo- party support is a positive he is right, that ifç we want o w3ççkçstop yemen becoming a e çdangerous for the ground for ççterrorism, it needs to devep the sort of life chances that you and i take for granted. >> at enormous cost and a loss of british human lives, we joined america at in an invasion

of iraq and afghanistan. before we commit even more human lives to another nightmare, should we consider the possibility of having an independent, british foreign policy? >> we should certainly have a foreign policy that is decided independently by the government and people of this country. what we should not have is an isolated attempt to workq on its own. i am proud that we are close partners of the united states, of the european union, and a large number of countries in the gulf who are concerned actually, the attention we have been paying to get men over the past 18 months is a significant product of thei] growing concern in 2008 from countries in the gulf who wanted british help because of their concerns about the situation in yemen. we are not unwelcomew3 helpers n yemen. we're not trying to recall a nice yemen. --ç recolonize yemen.

>> whilst i welcome a short discussion about yemen, we are having this discussion because of al qaeda. would it not be instructive of the government to produce a document or hold a london conference and invite international partners to talk about the international strategy to talk about -- against al qaeda before we have the other countries where al qaeda is offered -- operating but not necessarily in the news at the moment? >> i think he would be one of the first to recognize that simply to talk about al qaeda and not distinguish between its senior leadership based in afghanistan and pakistan, the al qaeda of the arabian peninsula, al qaeda and in other areas, there are distinctive issues related to this senior leadership and the franchises on the other. there shouldç be a steady to

debate and the more the better as far as i'm concerned. there was our recent meeting with parliamentarians on the situation in yemen before the christmas incident. there is a thrivingç all-party parliamentary group, chaired by my hon. friend that speaks to the close links that exist between britain and yemen. long a that continue. >> is a significant proportion of terrorists turned out to be radicalized here inç britain, ratherw3 than niemen ?rd elsewh, should not t prime minister also be considering the radicalization that takes place here? -- rather than just in yemen. >> there have been a large number of meetings. -- not just within government but all around the country to address this issue. >> mr. speaker, i agree with the

foreign secretary about the importance of aid in removing what i call this courage of these spots where terrorism-- the scurge were the spots of terrorism can rise up. they described as yemen as fragile. çcould the foreign secretary indicate just how widely supported is the government of yemen of cross all the people, bearing in mind the tribal conflicts in the north and the separatist movements in the south? >>çç far be it from me it to a lawyer for the right hon. gentleman, but i thinkç he said that yemen is fragile, rather than the government is for agile. in his defense, or at least an explanation of his position -- the government is fragile. the president is currently in his second term of office.

the constitution prohibits him running for a third term. parliamentary elections are due in 2011, in yemen, and they will clearly be a massive challenge. one of the issues that will need to be addressed our democratic elections and the ability of people to express their opinions. the number of citizens committed to violence, whether through the movement in the north of the separatist movement in the south, with links to al qaeda, is a small minority. >> all over the world, our armed forces and our aid budgets are stretched, in afghanistan, in pakistan and in somalia. why has the prime minister chosen to take a lead in yemen or in our resources are stretched? is it better for the u.s. to take a lead? >> so much for an independent foreign policy, mr. speaker.

this country has longstanding history with yemen, and i think that gives us an important role. secondly, we are in a group of donors with the united states, with the germans, with the dutch as well, and with the saudi arabia into our preeminent donors. in terms of the stretch, we have been careful to make sure that in our funding and yemen we only spend what we know the government has the ability to properly spent there. he is right that there are a range of other problems. somalia is addressed best through the amazon security work, but on the political level through the un security council. the meeting that has been called an the other forms of corporation being established the fits the situation in yemen. somalia is rather different. >> international aid funding which they have promised -- it pales against what the oil-rich

countries should be providing shouldn't her majesty's government make clear -- shouldn't her majesty's government make clear how much they should spend, rather than spending millions of pounds? >> i am not sure that the government spending money on skyscrapers is what he is referring to. some of the largest pledges at the 2006 conference were from gulf countries, not from western countries. it is important that those pledges are fulfilled. which of those pledges that? the bank paid? that is a curtain in point in regard to this. -- which of these has been paid? it is not to say that we have the biggest program. it is to explain that we have the berdych program. he has a right to say that this initiative -- we have a british program. he has a right to say that they

have put us on the alert about their needs third . >> secretary allen johnson. >> with permission, i would like to take a statement on the failed attempt to destroy a passenger plane at the detroit airport and its implications for national security. on december 24, abdulmutallab, the nigerian citizen it traveled from lagos to amsterdam, where he boarded the 2 flight53 2 detroit -- flight 253 to detroit. on the way, he detonated a device on his thigh which resulted in a fire. he was subdued by flight crew and passengers. remains in custody in the u.s.

-- many countries are doing everything they can to piece together his movements shortly before this attack and are considering what urgent steps need to be taken to prevent further attacks of this nature. it is an issue of grave concern at that the explosive device was not detected by security in nigeria or in the netherlands. as has been widely reported, he attended university college london between 2005 and 2008, where he completed a degree in engineering. during this time, he was known to the security service but not as somebody engaged in violent extremism. his family and friends have stated their belief that he turned to this during his time in yemen. from the information we have currently, it is not possible to chart with absolute certainty his exact movements after he left the u.k. 14 months ago. he is known to of spent several

months studying international business at the university and dubai and in august, 2009, he traveled to yemen where he is thought to have stayed until december before returning to west africa. he came to the attention of u.k. authorities again on april 28, 2009, when he applied for a multi-entry, student visitor visa to attend a course provided by discovering life coaching, based in east london. the u.k. border agency refused to his application because discovery did not hold a valid accreditation with a u.k.- approved body and was not eligible to sponsor international students. since march, 2009, only institutions that are sponsors or hold a valid accreditation are permitted to bring in short- term foreign students from outside the eea.

universities and colleges must be able to demonstrate that they are offering a genuine courses that will benefit students seeking toq study in the uk. this new regime has reduced the number of institutions able to bring students into the u.k. from 4000 to approximately 2000. following the refusal of his application, his name was added to the u.k. watch list. mr. speaker, in light of the serious questions this incident raised, i want to set out today first lead the immediate steps we are taking to tighten aviation security. secondly, what measures were taken to prevent radicalization in our universities. thirdly, the actions we are taking to disrupt al qaeda in countries where they are known to be active and to prevent future terrorist attacks and to improve cooperation with our international partners. it is of great concern abdulmutallab was able to

penetrate airport security at amsterdam. the device used had clearly been constructed with the precise aim of making detection by existing screening methods extremely difficult. abdulmutallab underwent a security check at the airport in amsterdam, as do all passengers transferring from nigeria to another flight of the the it -- although theç airport was using some of these in trial, there were not used for that flight. he passed through the metal detector. however, certain types of explosives, without metallic parts, which can also be concealed next to the body, cannot be detected by these technologies which is the reason why airports also search passengers at random. to defeat the terrorist threat requires constant vigilance and adaptability.

a great deal of progress has been made in enhancing aviation and border security since 9/11, but terrorists are invented. the scale in nature of the threat changes and new technology needs to be harnessed to meet new threats, whilst minimizing inconvenience to passengers. last year, we issued a new public guidance to the industry on our technical requirements for screening and the detection of improvised explosive devices. . .

the government will direct an increase of passengers being searched in this way. there may be some delays, but i am sure the traveling public will appreciate the reason behind this. the transportation secretary has also brought into force new restrictions which tighten up security screenings for new passengers. it is reviewing security standards and airports operating direct flights to the u.k. there will also be an increase

number of the dogs to had to our capabilities. the first canners will be deployed in around three weeks at heathrow. over time, they will be introduced for widely. we will be reviewing all airports to introduce explosive trace detection equipment by the end of the year. the best way of doing all of this will be dealing with the operational and privacy issues involved. we've started training airport security staff and behavioral analysis techniques which will help them to spot passengers acting unusually and target them for additional search. beyond this, we examining -- we are examining whether additional passenger profiling could help security. we will be mindful of civil

liberties concerns and aware that identity-based profiling has its limitations, but conscious of our overriding obligations to protect people's lives in liberties. these build on the substantial progress we have made in recent years to strengthen our borders, including protecting people in transit against the watchless will be 95% complete by the end of the years. it makes is one of a handful of countries to have the technology that can carry out advance passenger checks against our watch list before people travel to the u.k. those who apply for rugby's the will have to provide fingerprints and their records are checked against the new watchlist which holds over 1 million records of known criminals, terrorists, people retry the into the country illegally, or those who have

been deported, and those considered to be a threat to our security. through the e-borders program, we have made 4900 arrests since 2005. in addition, the uk borders bath working with airlines prevented over 65,000 adequately documented passengers from travelling to the u.k. during 2009. mr. speaker, addulmutallab's failed attack highlights the importance of information sharing between the various agencies about people who pose a threat to our security. you can watch list is managed by the u.k. border agency and incorporates intelligence from the law enforcement and the security and intelligence agencies into a single index. nevertheless, although the

integrated approach works very well, we want to see if we can further strengthen it. we will be conducting an urgent review with the robustness of our watch list. it will report to me and two week's time and i will report the findings subject to security restrictions. there is a concern that addulmutallab's radicalization may have been fuelled or started at university college, london. the tolerance promoted in higher education are one of the most effective ways of challenging views which we may find abhorrent but that remain within goal. however, we know that the small minority of people supporting violent extremism have actively sought to influence and recruit people through targeting

learners and colleges and universities, and we must offer universities guidance to help prevent extremism. as part of a measured and effective response to the threat, the department of business innovation and skills have published guidance on managing the risk of violent extremism in universities, and will work closely with universities to provide targeted support. alongside this, each university has a designated police security contact that university management can discuss concerns with. the strategy works closely with the higher and further education secretaries and has a full-time officer. his family believes that if left -- he turned to extremism after leaving the u.k. but we need to make sure that we continue our efforts to stop radicalization

of young people in our universities. finally, mr. speaker, i want to say something about our work internationally and the steps the government is taking abroad to disrupt al qaeda where ever they are. our success in tackling the international terror threat depends on strong relationships with our international partners. in our efforts to fort al qaeda, we have a longstanding productive partnership with the u.s. i am not prepared to discuss in this particular case about what we established -- what we shared and wind. we do not routinely comment on such intelligence matters. moreover, some of these issues are still current and are highly sensitive. however -- however, i would like to clarify that whilst we did provide information to the u.s. link to the wider aspects of this case, none of the

information we held or shared indicated that addulmutallab was about to attempt a terrorist attack against the u.s. i spoke to the secretary of state and the homeland security. we discussed in the light of this failed attack that we will work together with our international partners to maintain confidence in aviation security and deepen our partnership to disrupt al qaeda's activities overseas. forced out of afghanistan and under increasing pressure in the borders of pakistan, affiliate's and allies of al qaeda like al qaeda in the arabian peninsula group claiming responsibility for the detroit of -- bombing have raised their profile. then again demonstrated their intent to attack innocent people across the world. the aim of our counterterrorism strategy is not to reduce our

own vulnerability alone, but to disrupt those organizations that pose a threat to the u.k., whether at home or abroad. al qaeda will take any opportunity to exploit instability, whether the threat is in somalia or yemen, pakistan, iraq, or afghanistan. we must support governments and work with partners to address both the threat of attack as well as the underlying causes of extremism and instability. we have been working with the yemeni government, as my right honorable friend, the foreign secretary, has just said through law enforcement and security apparatus to disrupt al qaeda and denied their safe haven in yemen in the future. we are also one of the leading donors to the development of the country, standing at 100 million pounds by 2011. we recognize the need to strengthen further our

partnership with countries in the region and beyond. that when we can coordinate against al qaeda more effectively and find greater support for the many people to reject extremism. international cooperation is critical to making what is a global threat, the coming together to discuss yemen will be an important step toward security there and across the globe. mr. speaker, it is important to reiterate that this was a failed attack by a nigerian national on the u.s. by someone who was refused entry to the u.k. and who it seems was radicalized after he left this country. however there are lessons to be learned by the international community and the measures that i have outlined will provide the u.k. greater protection from terrorist attack. along with our work overseas and our international -- and with our international partners, enhanced airport security and more thorough collation of

intelligence, we will be able to strengthen our efforts to attack the root cause of violent extremists on and reduce the threat of future attack. i commend the statement to the house. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i am grateful for the home secretary providing me an advance copy of this statement. let me start by dealing with the issue of airport security. i think we all have said that we have learned lessons from their recent plot, happily unsuccessful, that additional security measures will have to be taken. the use of more sophisticates -- sophisticated scanning technologies are inevitable, though we have to make sure that sensible measures are taken to maintain privacy. but the statement is actually ambiguous about scanners. can he be clear, does he plan to make full body scanners compulsory at all u.k. airports? kenny clarify the situation also with the european union over the use of e-borders?

we also believe that it is necessary to take a more intelligence-led approached, all much security as well as pledging for suspicious behavior among passengers. the government will have our support in taking prudent measures to protect passengers. these must under be -- these must be under constant review. however, mr. speaker, the percentage planning themselves should not be the home secretary but the prime minister for it twice in three games the prime minister has been caught out making false claims about the contacts made between britain and the united states all over the security threat to our airport. he admitted to the bbc that supposed discussions between him and president obama of about the bomb plot about the situation in yemen had not actually taken

place. then yesterday he claimed that britain had supplied intelligence about the bomb suspect and his link to extremists to the united states in 2008, a claim that downing street now admits is untrue. this the government that have systematically misused intelligence over the years, most notably in the so-called dodgy dossier for the prime minister to mislead our spend intelligence information, particularly when related to a terrorist threat, does he agree that this is absolutely on acceptable behavior -- unacceptable behavior? it is to establish an acceptable principle that we did not comment on intelligence matters. why did the prime minister break that rule this week? does the home minister also agree with me that it is damaging to our most important

intelligence relationships with the united states for information to be disseminated by downing street in such an inaccurate and cavalier way? mr. speaker, this entire house will be relieved that on this occasion the bomb plot was unsuccessful. it will serve as a strong reminder to the governments across the world of the ever- present terrorist threat and we all need to remain vigilant about that threat as well as united in a determination to defeat it. it is also worth saying that the threat from a small group of islamic is remiss -- extremists in no way reflects the views of the vast majority of decent months and people around the world. people who have always been victims of terrorism of the decades, we must band together regans that thread. that task has not been helped by the actions of downing street in recent days. >> mr. secretary. >> mr. speaker, i do regret the

fact that the honorable member uses this very tense time to score cheap party political points. to use this issue -- mr. speaker, i saw lots of faces on the benches opposite appalled that this situation should be used to make personal attack on the prime minister. the honorable member on the raised three points that i believe are relevant to this issue. the first in terms of the number of all body scanners. what we need to do know is work with the airline industry to decide how many and where we can locate these scanners. as i said in my statement, we will have the first ready at heathrow within three weeks. there is a limited capacity to manufacture these and that these employees and also get the authority and the agreement of the different airline companies

and their input into this. that will become much more widely available. the honorable member also talked of the eu's situation. that was clarified before christmas and there will be no e.u. community issues about the transfer of their permission. it still needs the country's transferring that information to agree about transferring techniques, but there is no e.u. issue which the commission it was originally looking record and the third issue, which was about our use of intelligence and about our cooperation with united states. the prime minister was absolutely right, as i said in my statement, that we did share information with the u.s. none of this information or the nature of that information and the affirmation itself that we do not routinely comment on, but none of that suggested that addulmutallab was planning a terrorist plot. incidentally, i met jane lucas and mentioned that statement

today, and she did not mention this issue at all this morning. this is a productive way to deal with this issue. to deal with these issues, and there is absolutely no relationship in the world stronger than the relation between the u.s. and the u.k., particularly on counter- terrorism where we work together and we will continue to work closely together in the light of this latest threat. >> chris him. -- hume. >> i thank the secretary for statement. the announcement that scanners will be rolled out its welcome. but there are several questions to be raised, and can they -- and can confirm that all body scanners would have detected the substances carried by umar farouk addulhutallab? why is it taken so long for him to act, given that they are already in trial, and four are

reported to be in storage at heathrow? and the third question is whether he will respect those who may have a deep felt objection to be -- to the scanners to opt instead for a pat down? and can he give assurances that the images will not be stored? profiling -- what does that mean? does he mean additional services for suspicious -- those with suspicious travel partners? there will be several in this house that will dead. it means stopping every one that looks at asian, then he will alienate those two in -- his cooperation we need. then there is the information's sharing, which the home secretary really cannot commit -- dismissed by saying that the government does not comment on intelligence matters, particularly on recent developments from downing street? can he confirm that downing

street told the u.s. that the bomber had linked to extremist groups, and that he was placed on the u.k. watch list? and a lot of these contradictions and the open spat with our closest ally, what measures has the government taken to improve the liaison with the indicted states or possibly with the prime minister's press operation? given the detroit bombers layover, were the dutch authorities shared with our european -- was the affirmation shared with our european partners, and how can an eu country be informed of such information? do we routinely share information about our watch list

to our unity and car parts -- european counterparts? and do these systems need to be improved? >> mr. secretary. >> on the issue of scanners. what they had been effective in relation of the time? the indications are, given where the six bosun was place, with them o -- with the explosive was ta -- where the explosion was in place, there was a 50% chance of being detected. i think that we need to see the next wave of technology with explosive detection as well as the body imaging issue. we need to see that ahead very quickly. i do not accept that we took so long that act. this happened on christmas day and over the christmas period we

have been discussing -- my colleagues at the secretary of state have been talking about the availability of this equipment. there was one body scanner at manchester. there have been a number at heathrow on a trial basis, but whether they are serviceable or whether they need to be operated on to be serviceable, is still an open question. the issue of privacy, mr. speaker, is going to be an important issue, but given that all of the images are destroyed immediately, given that the person responsible for the scanning is separate in a separate room. there is a version that glass co as well. there is no immediate contact between the person doing the imaging and a person being imaged. i think we have to put these considerations -- they are important, but i think that we can actually ensure that those

concerns will be satisfied. i cannot see a situation where people can simply object to a body scan. perhaps not as the first line, but as the second line on iran the bases as part of the defense. the honorable member mentioned the important issue of profiling. i said in the statement i recognize the sensitivities here. anyone who looks at the case in 1986, a pregnant woman in faded by her syrian -- inveigled by her syrian boyfriend to carry a bomb on board, the name would not have alerted anyone, but nevertheless the issue of whether we can deal with some of the sensitivity issues must be part of l%9eñ any defense we can find to ensure that this gap in our defenses, which

thankfully was unsuccessful but which was found, and we need to recognize the concerns and the civil rights issues as well. on the issue of information sharing, we shared information all the time. we share information on a routine basis and you -- and the u.s. share information with us. we did not inform at the u.s. that addulmutallab was on our watch list because he refused a student visa, because that was an issue conducted without any concern that he was coming to commit a terrorism incident. it was about an immigration issue. we would not share that routinely with the u.s. but we share other information with u.s., and we share this information routinely with our european union partners, although if there are concerns about counter-terrorism, it would not wait for a watch list and it would not wait for the plane to be taking off. it is outside of europe where we

have the problem. within the european union, we have a very close relationship which means that we deal with the security issue straight away. we do not wait until they are trying to get on the plane and other countries. >> order. several members are seeking to catch my eye. like to accommodate everyone. the number should be perfectly manageable. level me remind the house that there are two further statements to follow. each honorable member should ask a single, short, supplementary question, and that the home secretary will reply within equally economical answer. >> the home secretary is right to consult with the airline and measure the response, and we ought to have these body scanners. the international cooperation

aspect is the most important. are there any more lessons to be learned as to how we can improve the situation? >> doubtless there are, and i recognize my right honorable friends expertise in this matter. i said in relation to the watch list, we think this integrated watch list so that there's not a separate -- in some countries there is a separate one for security and for policing in crime, and for those who lost their passports and immigration issues, and integrate the watch list and with e-borders continually coming onstream, we can deal with this that has taken off. given that addulmutallab was not tried to enter the country but blow himself up before it landed, and that does not matter if this -- and it does not matter what country was his

destination. i would be the last person to appear complacent about this. at the prime minister said, this is a wake-up call. every attempt must be picked to pieces of that we can find anything we can to strengthen our defenses and that is what we intend to do. >> mr. taylor. >> does the home secretary realize that scanners cover all white area? some require you to go through a box and others actually can do it remotely in airport lounges or railway stations. can the government institute a research program -- several british companies are involved in this -- but we need to stay ahead of the terrorist and not deploy after every incident? >> the honorable member raises a valuable point. we are dealing with smith industry shortly and talking to the document that we repeat --

that we produce last year about our security minister in 2009, it was specifically aimed at the scientific community innovators to get this moving and to find new ways to deal with this. i think that the important part about this is that there is a big part of the british technology here said that we can actually exploit it and insurer -- which is one reason to talk to the airlines -- and that soul -- and you're absolutely right. there are a variety of these scanners and we need to use them effectively. >> john bolwheaton. >> can i welcome the emphatic way in which the home secretary emphasized that there is no single magic bullet to solve these problems? in light of recent media comments, particularly the full

body scanners which require standardized procedures, which are still in trials, and it requires a range of search procedures and technology, and above all, the last honorable gentleman who spoke said that it will require constant innovation in batted in everything that we do. can i therefore ask the home secretary it will build upon the good work been done by lord west and make sure that a partnership of the government and private industry is given more resources in order that we can stay ahead of the cut of the terrorists in introducing new ways of terror? >> mr. secretary. >> i think my right honorable friend makes the point that my right honorable friend did and i agree. this is about reasonable efforts to stay ahead of the terrorists. we will not deal with the issue of body scanners alone. sniffer dogs every day, in looking for ptpn, and the use of

behavioral detection -- all the techniques that we can use, even then we will not be 100 percent. we can never guarantee 100% safety. but there are a lot of people out there waiting to innovate and to work and to provide equipment in a technological capacity that can move us to the next level. i believe that that is really the main lesson of detroit on the 25th of december. >> mr. robert keep. >> willie acknowledged a debt that we owed to the ministry of defense personnel and other start reduce servants working at one company in my constituency about terrorism who are responsible for all of the day-by-day innovation which goes on in terms of science and technology? and willie talk to the ministry

of defence to have tremendous budget problems to ensure that there is not only no cut in the defense budget as it affects this, but that they should have all the resources that they need to counter terrorism? the boilers the home secretary. >> the honorable member is a great advocate for his constituency. i am talking to the defense secretary perry this is a cross-government initiative. we are all working to do this using all the agencies of our government. >> aviation -- what new steps are being taken to link intelligence information with the best system of security at individual airports? babblers mr. home secretary. >> my honorable member -- my honorable friend is a member of the transport secretary committee. talking to jay lucas today,

we're talking about the lessons from it and we're still talking through -- there was a view that we should go to brussels and the opportunity of the spanish presidency very interested in this matter comes up in a few weeks' time. more and more we're centering on that, the opportunity to get transport ministers, homeland security ministers, perhaps defense ministers as well together to talk about an integrated program as to how we can act internationally. my honorable friend is absolutely right. by its very definition, a nigerian coming through holland to detroit with ramifications for a much wider set of countries, we need to deal with his senate -- with this internationally. >> mr. speaker, to organize the -- who authorized the downing

street spokesman to talk about the bomber? >> i will not get into who authorized to to say what. what the prime minister said about exchanging information with united states was absolutely right. not all of that information remotely -- not that informational remotely indicated that he was planning an attack. >> with my right honorable friend considered a central reporting area for members of the public who spot lapses of security in airports in which they are traveling coming in to the uk? the boilers mr. home secretary. the >> i will consider my honorable friend's suggestions. there are plenty of opportunities for people to report these things. there was a program over christmas about the emergency service being misused. there is a problem and a security problem, that is one

cause of action and there are others. my honorable friends makes a good point and we will look away to make it easier for the traveling public to report any suspicious that they have. >> we have the only airport in the u.k. sector to terrorist attacks in scotland. can the scottish airports expected be a first line for the body scans and can he assure me that he will be working hand in glove with a scottish government to ensure that the scottish airports are safe as possible? >> i can answer the honorable member on both of those points. we need to talk about which airports for three i believe he wrote, given the huge amount of transit -- because we're talking about transit passengers as well. addulmutallab was a transit passenger in holland and was not searched possible -- properly. i believe the discussions have already started with a scottish governments. >> mr. speaker, if we're

concerned with the immediate threats obviously, but i -- can i pass on a warning given by a constituent who works in airports that there has been talk of introducing competition between terminals. with the on secretary ensure that security always comes before competition? >> the home secretary. >> i can give that assurance. i am not sure to what the honorable member is referring, but in terms of providing security, no matter the terminal, the absolutely -- the absolute priority is security not competition. >> there have been many hill had expressed concern about the activities of schools and the role that they play in that radicalizing man like addulmutallab. can he confirm that schools will

be swept up in those and that the matter of this schools will be -- the schools will be properly addressed? >> addulmutallab himself would to a british school, but this is an important issue that i need to discuss with my right honorable friend the foreign secretary to make sure that we're doing not only for local security but to prevent this radicalization taking place in the first place. with a that is in this country or abroad. >> during this debate there has been some very interesting proposals about investing in research about the technology required to detect terror. i am concerned, although the home secretary acknowledge the risk of identity basis is for profiling, that there will not be sufficiently robust -- robust research into the consequences on young men who are muslim or asian who think that they are expected to be paid in a certain way and therefore say, why don't

die? can he assure the house that there will be very robust research into the potential consequences of identity-based profiling before any such process is introduced? >> i can give my right honorable friend that assurance. behavior detection is different to profiling 3 behavior detection is something used by the british transport police. they are well trained to do that, and it is observing individuals and how they act around uniformed officers that gives certain signs away about whether they should be -- that is a preliminary to them being researched. it is different on profiling. i recognize that just the sensitivities and the civil liberties issues raised from the liberal -- the liberal democrat bridges -- ages, but we were talking about the terrorists being one step ahead, and if they think there is a profile that it escapes this, and it is our main weapon against them,

then they will use that, whether it is pregnant women and or whoever else a gentleman like me. i think that is the other danger of profiling and we need to be very careful, and i am acutely aware of that, but it would be strange that if in response to detroit we did not cover all the different elements and all the different options and it thoroughly air -- and thoroughly explore them. the dollar's been wallace. >> is it rich that the government has come here, year after year after cutting the defense budget, and what had [unintelligible] we have to go to the americans to get the funding because this government cut the funding. could the hong secretary please tell us what actual concrete resources he is going to put into further developing technologies and to make sure that our borders are secure?

>> i know the honorable member has some experience in this field. i do not understand the criticism of this government in terms of what we have invested. he is no longer in this place but the opposition benches, he was continually praising the government for the science and innovation project. when i was secretary of state at the old dti, half of my budget was signed. it was frustrating at times because i could not touch it for a good thing. criticize us for a lot at this, but did not criticize us for the budget. >> helen my right honorable friend consults and communicate changes that are made and profiling? it is difficult because these changes need to be made in a way that does that actually trigger, as you suggest, the knowledge of people that we're doing this, but it is important to avoid unnecessary communications as

well. >> i take my honorable friend's point. there would be no benefit from even studying the use of profiling if we were not sorting and did groups representing different ethnic minorities in this country. we have to take a bus along with us. -- we have to take them along with this. there will be different views in different communities among different ethnic minorities. all i am saying that this dispatch box, mr. speaker, is i think it would be irresponsible not to let it weather profiling can play a part in strengthening our defenses. >> to search people more thoroughly and introducing more body scanners, we will need more space and more employees at our airports. seeing that our airports appeared to be fully cram, will

he make it clear to the airports that security matters have to come first? >> maybe the honorable gentleman is inviting me to change the use of space at airports. this is one of the important discussions we ought to have with the airport authorities and with the airlines. how we physically can do this properly with the minimum of inconvenience to the public, and ensure that people can go about their daily business, that is a very important part of these discussions. >> then we have stronger action for people who are expected of promoting extremism and those to be suspect becoming radicalize, and can we include in that list those people who go on offense of marches? >> we always keep these issues under the.

it is important that we do not take action -- we are a democracy. on our university campuses, there needs to be proper debate. because people have the views that are found of all right but not illegal, it would be applauded for us to be heavy- handed in that respect. what we do to prevent is to strengthen the institutions to help individuals, to provide the information and the facts and the advice to those who want to counsel some of these radical views. as part of this, of course, we deport and seek to deport a lot of people. there are many cuing up for deportation at the moment. they had their right to be the use of the european court, all of that is important, but provided we have done our job, those people will be deported. >> given the strong links that umar farouk addulmutallab had in

this country, will the british police be able to interrogate him about those leaks? >> all that i can say at this stage, mr. speaker, is that two metropolitan police are working in america with the fbi on this case at the moment. the police were taking immediate action in this country. we did not comment on current police operation. we will have to wait for them to come to a conclusion that may well involve the british police asking questions 3 we will have to see how the operation does. >> i have some constituents expressing concerns about health risks and dignity. is there anything on the public record about these matters? >> in terms of radiation, one is that there is less radiation

from bodies can then you will get from actually flying, from the flight itself. on the issue of privacy, we can think and do more but at the moment the fact that all the images are distorted immediately, the fact that the person operating the machine is remote from the person being scanned, and that therefore there is no face to face contact, they are anonymous when being scanned, it is difficult to get around the privacy issues, given where addulmutallab was trying to hide his explosives. we will have to deal last delicate about privacy in order to effectively counter. >> you can see president obama's, airline security and reaction to the attempted christmas day attack tonight at 8:00 eastern here on c-span. the house gavels in today to start the second session of the 111th congress.

business was very short period bill debate resumes a week from today in the house. the senate will begin on january 20. see the senate live on c-span2. the british house of commons returns from its holiday will break this week and we will have live coverage of prime minister's question time when prime minister gordon brown takes questions from members of parliament. live coverage tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span2. >> from the wall street journal economic editor on ben bernanke and the role he played after the economic collapse of 2008. he will discuss his book with alice rivlin, former federal reserve vice chair. after words, part booktv we can on c-span2. >> the state department said that a number of visas had been

revoked following the christmas day bombing attempt on flight to madrid 53. the spokesman discusses this and other security efforts for about 45 minutes. >> good afternoon and welcome to the department of state. happy new year to you all. a few announcements before taking your questions. the united states embassy in yemen reopen today for business following the twa -- the two-day closure pointing to the likelihood of terrorist attacks in the yemeni capital. it is offering its full range of consular services as usual today. we know that there was some action by the government of yemen security forces yesterday north of the capital.

those actions addressed a specific area of concern. the contrary to the embassies decision to resume operations today. -- they contributed to the embassy's decision to resume operations today. it has been subject to attacks in the past. we know that the world food program has suspended its operations in southern somalia because of foreign terrorist organization another violent extremists are systematically attacking and threatening humanitarian aid workers. the world food program provides live saving food aid to more than 3.8 million people throughout somalia. the actions of this group means that approximately 900,000 of these beneficiaries and southern somalia or approximately 33% of the caseload will not have

access to this critical system. the united states remains committed to working with the international committee to meet the humanitarian needs of the somali people. we will continue to work with the floor -- the world food program and other un and non- governmental partners to provide the mandatary assistance to the people of somalia. it is an example of why the united states remains the primary donor to the transitional federal government in somalia. it is a clear alternative -- clearly working on behalf of the people of somalia, and these organizations are denying the people of somalia the assistance that they need. the assistant secretary for african affairs met today in morocco, all of his counterparts from france, with members of the guinea's ruling junta.

they discussed the regional security and our ideas on how to seek a peaceful resolution to the political situation in danny -- in gettuinea. we support a civilian government leading to free and fair transparent democratic elections. and finally we have an official in honduras today and tomorrow. meeting with various sectors of including the president-elect lobo, continuing to move the process for. -- forward as we approach the

inauguration of the president on january 27. and we continue to work with those parties on the expeditious formation of the establishment of a truth commission. with that -- one final point. this afternoon the secretary will participate in the white house meeting as the present reviews not only steps taken in the aftermath of the december 25 attempted bombing of the airliner and working across enter agency to prepare ideas on how we can make the system more effective. >> let's start with honduras. isn't it beside the point now, when you're going to implement the san jose process, you have

an election coming up, you have already said that you will have to deal with the new government -- what is this symbolic box checking, making sure that you implement the san jose accord with the new government? >> what happened in june represents a breach in the heart of honduran society and to some extent that tension is still there. you're right, there is a new government that will be installed on january 27, the real question is, can that government be a vehicle through which we begin the healing process and a situation where the honduran people can unite behind this new government. that is our primary government -- our primary step. >> that tension was from the

role and the people who wanted him back again? >> that is true. by the same token, our interest is in seeing a true restoration of constitutional and democratic rule, and to see honduras contributing member of the internet but community. >> i understand that. >> and by the way, we do have some decisions to make about the future nature of our relationship. as a setback in november, the election was a step forward. we felt that the results to reflect the will of the honduran people. that said, the election by itself was not enough to -- we have some decisions to make in terms of the nature of our relationship, the nature of assistance in the future. so there are still steps that honduras has to take, and we are encouraged by comments by

president-elect lobo, but we are there to continue to move this process forward not only did get to january 27, but most importantly to see that government advance once it is in office. >> i am sorry -- no. i have a couple more questions on this. in to stand about -- i understand about moving forward, but how about undoing what you did -- not what you did, but what was done in honduras at the absolute last minute right before the inauguration of this new president about repairing the constitutional breach that took place? why would you need to reevaluate what kind of relationship you need with honduras going for it? while it to punish this new government for what happened before that -- why would you punish this new government for what happened before that?

>> not only do we support a government of national unity to replace all the components -- >> for a day or a couple of days? >> with support the formation of a national unity government there represents a broad interest in honduras. but most importantly, if you need to have this truth commission that is part of a healing process that has to occur if honduras is going to a dance. there are a number of steps in the san jose accord. some of them have been implemented but not all. this continues to demonstrate our commitment to the people of honduras and to the future relationship between the united states and honduras. craig is there to communicate clearly to a variety of parties that there are still things that honduras has to do. >> can we go back to dimon? he said that the actions taken

yesterday by the yemeni government address a specific area of concern and contributed to the embassies decision to reopen. is that another way of saying they neutralize the threat yesterday? >> there is an ongoing threat to and to american citizens in yemen. >> the specific threat because the embassy to closes down along with their of -- because of what happened yesterday? >> one aspect of the threat has been dealt with. based on the actions that yemenis have taken. >> the secretary said in her comments that at this london conference coming up at the end of the month, and even before then, that the u.s. and its partners who are trying to help yemen would put certain conditions and expectations -- that the yemeni government had to meet if in fact this assistance was continue -- was

to continue to be forthcoming. can you be more than specific about those conditions? >> recall the challenge of yemen security within the country, the impact of extremist elements in yemen but to the region and more broadly -- this is nothing new. we only have to go back to october 2000, remember the attack on the uss call. we have been providing security assistance to yemen for quite some time. we will continue to work with human. -- with yemen. but we continue to make clear that there are things that they need to do, things like the action taken yesterday -- a step in the right direction. we need to see at yemen of much or consistent approach to dealing with the extremism within their borders. it is important to understand that there are layers of conflict with the and yemen.

there is the threat from al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, there is the ongoing problem between sunni and shiite elements in the government her -- in the area. what we want to see -- and part of what the secretary talk to her account about from qatar guest today was in fact out the united states, working closely with countries in the region, how do we provide important support to yemen and make sure that we also help them improve their own performance in terms of dealing with this threat? on january 28, there will be an important meeting in london three part of that meeting will be focused on afghanistan, part will be focused on yemen, and we're still working out the specific arrangements with the british and other countries on exactly how that will take place.

but clearly we have provided significant support to yemen and we're going to continue to do that, but we want to see dimon's import -- performance implement -- improve as we go forward. >> in his run down yester day on that 1206 funds, he mention what they got in 2009, but it does not look like they got anything in 2008. >> yemen did not receive any 12 06 funds in 2008, but they have a very specific set of uses. and there were not any specific counter-terrorism projects for yemen that met all of the requirements for that particular fiscal year. we abroad program assistance to yemen in terms of development, and terms of security assistance. we've recently expanded an

increase that significant -- that assistant's significantly, and we will continue to assess what human needs and provide what we can and work with other countries in the region to provide assistance to yemen. catarrh, saudi arabia, other countries have contributed significantly to yemen, but we need to set capacity increase in yemen and a determination increase in yemen to deal with these extremists that threatened yemen, the united states, and other countries in the region. >> of the u.s. in 2008 did not see any requirement in yemen that would allow them to release these 1002 in six funds? >> there were no project to qualify for that particular subcategory of funding. >> in the development and security assistance that he talked about yesterday, can you separate out what is development

and anti-poverty or reconstruction project from the security part of it? >> let's see if we can put together some kind of -- >> is still confusing when you say development and security assistance. presumably some of that could go toward things that would be normally covered by the 1206 monday. it sounds that way. >> i don't have a specific breakdown here. .

okççw3xde that circulated around the press in recent days. çç;çççççthey made a parn regarding a visa application by this individual -- i have found no one who said that, nor would that be necessary. as i a understand, britain made a decision basedq on immigration çgrounds, false information. that was based on domestic criteria that had nothing to do with terrorism, but we have cooperated on thisi] particular case, as we do. it is one of our closest allies, and we share information all the time. >> would you say this highlights the need for better coordination among allies, about sharing information about visas and people who could provide

potential flight risk? >> this has been a significant component of our combating b4gzextremism in the post 9-11 . we have been a number of ways in manyçç countriesko expanded or intelligence sharing cooperation. as part of this review that is ongoing, we will look at all aspects of this, but i cannot say0tuawet(çokzv are currenty focused on that as a crucial aspect ofymi] this. we value the two operations from a variety it --i] we value cooperation from a variety of countries, including britain. we will always look at sharing information. >> clearly,çóçt(ç looking at t wrong and how you can fix it,

there must been a realization that better sharing of xo-yinformation among countrie, that if someone presents a slight risk in onexdçç countrt he presents a slightç riski] in allied countries, and eventuallyxd -- ç>>t(ño#w÷ok[mçrtiñ let's e more broadly. i]tceññry/6çóçççfirst, toda'n 3iñsto the fact thr system failed in this case.

we are always looking for ways so the people of the united states can feel secure and other countries can feel confident in the security cooperation they have with the united states, so i think this is a constant process. were we looking for ways in which you can improve across the board? sure, that is part of the review. >> a couple of things on visas. there has been some reporting that you yourself or through the government's interagency process that several visas have

been revoked as a result of this review. perhaps some people were on one watchless and have been moved to another. if you can shed light onw3çç, and there are some critics that say theçmy processing and secuy related to the visa process has been a lot more harder overç te years and perhaps should be removed from the state department and put in a law enforcement agencies like other countries do, where all border w3protection, including visas, should be handled by dhs and not the state department. what are your thoughts on that? >>ç these are different issues. first, as i think the white house indicated yesterday, we have been scrubbing databases, and as a result ofw3 that actio,

additional visas have been foç haveñr suspected tiesq to terrorism. there are a lot of numbers out there, but this is an ongoing process, and rest assured in light of what happened with these databases, there have been additional actions taken. >> can you quantify that? >> no. >> how do we know this is actually happening if you do not know? >> i do know. i can say broadly that since 9- 11 roughly 1700 visas have been -- >> since 9-11? >> roughly 1700 visas have been revoked -- let me finish.

>> we knew that last week. >> have we added to that number since december 25? the answer is yes. i am not going to talk about a number. i do not think it is truthful to get into a score board about how many people have we found today who have links to terrorism. that is not something we feel comfortable discussing publicly. >> you may not think it is useful, but i think to the general public it is useful to know their government is doing something. >> and i am here to tell the american people the government is doing something. we are taking action. we are adjusting the criteria through which we decide who is on the watch list, who is on the no-fly list,ç and who might hae a visa that should be revoked. we are taking specific action, and that is the purpose of the meeting with president this

afternoon to see what else we need to do. are we doing that? we are. we have to discuss numbers to the public? i don't think we do. >> there was a focus on the middle east tour of africa? >> i n understand there were five visas revokedw3. that is actually on the same pace as one every two daysç if you do the math. çhow can you say this is an intensified process? it seems like it is the same pace as it has been forç the lt two and a half years. >> that might suggest the system we had, while not perfect, can be better. >> we need anç assertion this s an intensified process. >> i believeç my colleague at e white house talked about the fact that in lightççç of sepr -- december 25, we have gone

back through databases. we haveq intensified our efforts across generations to make sure that all information relative to terrorismt( is on the table, and have we taken further action since december 25? the answer is yes. there are various numbers. there could have been a number that might have been two or three days ago, and additional steps have been taken since then. it is not fruitful to say that at any point this is the number, because this is something we do every day. we do this for a variety of reasons. we revoke visas because of fraudulent information. we revoke visas because of terrorist information. that is the continuous progress -- process. if you put out a number by today, by this afternoon it might be different again. that is among the reasons it is

very hard to think about this. >> the numbers do not seem to back of the fact this is an intensified process. >> let me try it one more time. given what happened on december 25, we have gone back over our databases. additional actions have been taken. if the answer is it is a relatively modest number, that is a sign that much of what we have put in place is actually working e effectively. that said, clearly, it was not working as it should in this particular case. can we do better? yes. the president said it last week, and we have a government effort to see how we can improve the system. to your second question, the president said very clearly the system failed. that does not mean the structure

failed. it is a tried and true instinct in washington, d.c., when something goes ron -- wrong, change the bureaucracy. we do not think this is -- we think this is necessary to do. there is a good reason he left his position. it was considered in depth in 2002 and 2003 when the department of homeland security was formed. it was decided that the counselor of affairs will remain withinç the department of stat, but the policy in terms of visas would rest with homeland security. in 2003, the department of state reached an understanding in terms of policy of visas and adjudication of visas. adjudication would be at our

hundreds of posts around the world. we think this is a structure that makes sense. in light of what happened december 25 along with the rest of government, we are going over what were the criteria that were used in assessing this particular threat? does that need to be adjusted in any way? that is part of the process. >> but about completely moving the rest of adjudication to visas? >> to the extent members of congress have used this idea, they confer well be hearings on this subject. we welcome -- there could very well be hearings on the subject area and we welcome discussion, but this remains an idea whose time has not come. >> it is a numbers game, but this government not -- this

administration makes a big deal about putting up progress reports. from stimulus money to god knows what else, and just becauseççe number might change by the end of the day, i did not think that means there is a number you might be able to give us now -- is not useful, so let me put that out there. >> i said fruitful. >> you used the word fruitful. >> i do not understand why it is not fruitful. assuming the number is right or wrong, it is it safe to assume this guy's visa has been revoked. >> yes. >he is not doing any traveling. >> i do not care if he is locked in a jail cell are not. does he have a valid visa to get into the united states? >> no.

>> of least one person has lost a visa since december 25. this is why i do not think it is not useful to give us numbers. >> i am not going to go there. it is not just be so. tó7qaççqxdzv#gé3ç watchless ças a general rule, they give you a broad numbers in terms of the number of people who might be on this list or that database. we do nonormally share the daily adjustments for any of ççthis process. ç>> would you say it is morn two or three visas? >> it is more than one. >> other than the issue of visas, are you changing the criteria by which the u.s. gives the visa? do you have a visa diversity

program that gives the visas to a lot of these countries that were not only on the state sponsor of terrorism list but on this list of 14 countries receiving special screening, is there any consideration of looking at quotas of visas from various countries and changing the criteria? >> the issue before us is not the original decision -- >> i understand. this is a separate question. >> let's go back over this. because of changes made after 9- 11, i am not sure -- everybody who seeks a visa as an interview. the counselor's office has access to information in terms of your she can make a fair determination for the individual

sitting in front of him or her and whether they are entitled to a visa. this process is subject to participation by various agencies, including the department of homeland security. there is also, even if you get a visa, the fail-safe of if you present your visa at the port of entry, the final decision as to whether you get in the country is made not by the state department but by customs and border protection. broadly speaking, we are comfortable with the process put in place since 9-11. that said, there was an issue in this particular case, not with the decision to issue the visa in the first place, but whether in light of this information, the visa should be revoked.

that is the larger point from your question. there is this tendency when a specific failure comes to light that we want to change the whole process. >> you are changing the whole process -- >> you change vol -- the process. çthis case showed gaps in the y the administration is functioning. the president has said that was unacceptable, and we're going to fix that. we are working across agencies to do that, and that is why the national security team is meeting with the president this afternoon. >> i and tristan that, but you made these new requirements for the -- i understand that, but you made these new requirements for the countries. >> that is not related to getting a visa. >> i understand it is not related to getting a visa, but i am asking if there isñ no

criteria for people asking -- applying for a visa from these 14 countries -- is it like if you are from yemen or nigeria can you give up all hope of getting a u.s. visa now? >> not at all. çqthat is one reasonç we opene embassy in yemen today. there are people seeking to come to the united states every day. we welcome people from around the world to visit the united states to study, to work, to go to disney world, whatever the case may be. we are certainly not suggesting we set up a fortress america. setting of a fortress america is counterproductive. it is not something of value, and it is not going to make us more secure. we continue to seek the commerce enter the united states. we recognize that people are

seeking to come to the united states, and not everyone has the best of intentions for give we are going to continue to work through this period to the extent that this entire process shows there are things we have to focus on to adjust, then we will do so. this is not a static process. the threat shift from this country to some other country. we may adjust our focus based on our assessment of risk, but certainly we continue to welcome people -- >> are you hearing from these 14 countries that apparently the nigerian foreign minister spoke to the ambassador complaining that nigeria was of the list? >> i am not here to go through the list of 14 countries.

i could have a quiz. >> the nigeria example in particular. >> to the extent there are countries there -- now subject to more intensive screening procedures at the airport, yes, we are hearing back. i am not going to get into the specifics, but this is part of the process of assessing not only those countries we have longstanding concerns about their support of terrorism but other countries where we think there may be existing safe havens, and for the time being we are taking this precautionary step now. >> there are some concerns -- q. but isn't -- some concerns --

[inaudible] >> cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism. >> you talked about human. no one -- about yemen and one reason you reopened it -- >> we have over 200 posts around the world were constant activity is available for people to travel to the united states of america. we welcome people to travel. it is in our interests. are there people in yemen we think still merit traveled to the united states? yes. >> given the situation there and the fact you had to close the embassy for two days, do you think it might be wise for well- considered to have little cause -- pause?

>> your question suggests there is a fairly broad sweep. the short answer is for those who seek to travel to the united states from yemen or other countries, they may be subject to screening procedures of the airport. but does not suggest if you are idea many citizens -- of yemen citizenship you are denied. >> i understand. the sec if you are taking -- last week it was said the department are under notice should say whether the person has a visa. is that the only step taken thus far?

as the criteria actually change, or is that still subject to review? >> the criteria used to evaluate any visa application, that criteria has not changed. >> why all of a sudden start issuing visas in yemen again? >> there is a second point, because it is important to recognize there is a specific report relating to an individual we have information on who is associated with terrorists in the past, and we have made the adjustment that in this report from now on it will specifically say whether or not this individual has current u.s. visa. that is a different element from

the average citizen, whether he or she is from yemen, pakistan, afghanistan, or any other country -- poland, and the ability of thatv: individual to come to an end -- an embassy, present an application, and received a visa to come to the united states. we want these people. it is in our interest. this interaction between american people and other countries is part of the process by which we will succeed and mitigates political extremism, so we are not closing our doors. we welcome people. we are going to make sure the process by which people come here is the safest in candy. -- the safest it can be. >> have you seen the comments from the chinese foreign ministry today about how it is

not time to talk about the program? if you have not, i will tell you that is what they said. how does that square with the international consensus you said you formed? >> let's recall, there are already sanctions against iran, and we are in conversation with our partners in the process, which includes china, and now that we are in january, we are talking to those countries. this is a subject that was discussed yesterday, as noted.

we are going to continue to have this conversation going forward with lots of countries, including china. it is no secret china and the united states looks set sanctions differently. -- look at stations differently. we will continue to work on both tracks, but specifically on that track we are talking about additional sanctions. as the secretary said, one possibility is to focus more specifically on the revolutionary guards that are taking a much more prominent role within iran. we want to do this in a way that can target specific enemies within the iranian government but would not punish the iranian

people. this is an ongoing process of dialogue. at any time a particular country might say this is a good idea or a bad idea. we would expect to move forward with this in coming weeks. >> do you think this is imperative for the sanctions to work, or would they move forward with sanctions that would not include china? >> part of this is a discussion of what the current situation is. perhaps others might have hoped that iran would respond. we continue to look at this with the sober focus.

iran has been unable and unwilling to respond to the offers on the table. whether or not today of particular part of the chinese government has a view, whether two weeks from now or four weeks from now after we have further discussion, after we start to do obtain some instances of the nature of action and potential steps, the likely impact on a nation like iran, the second change. >> [inaudible] >> of some point if this is going to beat a global effort, it will have to be presented to the un, and china has an important role in the un.

if something is presented and voted on, try and have a number of options. but will be a decision for china to make, but we're going to continue to talk about china and other countries and make the case that while the door remains open there will be a cost that iran will pay for the unwillingness to respond. >> one quick question. this guy's visa has been revoked. the other reasons that were revoked, what reason were the vote for? one does not have to actually blow off a plane to get a visa revoked, today? this is based on information -- were the others revoked?

>> we have revoked multiple visas since december 25 based on information we have relating to terrorism cases. >> but not actually attempting to blow up -- they did not actually do anything? >> it is based on our acceptance of the risk with specific individuals on information that we have from various sources. >> you do not have to actually commit a crime to get your visa revoked? >> correct. >> [inaudible] what is the u.s. reaction on that? >> we are very disappointed with

the taiwan legislature's decision to ban certain cuts of u.s. beef. we remain committed to developing of broader relationship with the people of taiwan. >> do you see -- [inaudible] >> i do not know. certain death of beef. -- certain cuts of beef. >> [inaudible] >> no, u.s. policy decisions are based on the taiwan act, and the unitedç states will continue to make available services needed for taiwan's self-defense. i]>> they met this morning.

i was wondering if that was just a courtesy call. >> that is a good question. she did meet with the nasa administrator. ñ productive in our view. they exchanged ideas about how they couldmy be mutually supportive to advance foreign- policy goals and using foreign policy to advance the objectives. >> [inaudible] >> can you tell us, did he meet with or discuss if the leader is still being treated there? was there any discussions with the leader? >> he did not meet with the

captain. he did meet with the acting general. >> did they discuss whether or not the captain will be returned? >> us to his future plans, i understand he is still in the hospital in morocco recovering from the wounds he sustained in guinea. wet( support the transition to civilian government and hopefully will begin a process that leads to a transparent democratic election, and we have said the very same thing. >> [unintelligible] >> yes. i think ambassador holbrooke is

on his way to london to do preparator were for the meeting çon january 28. >> does he plan to go anywhere else? >> that is a good question. ç>> [unintelligible] >> i am sure the ambassador will %9(p()h#rom time to time. whether he is doing that as part of this trip -- >> he is supposed to be back on friday. >> than he is expected to be back on friday. i am just a where he is in london. >> there are some reports that they may be visiting china any time soon, and with the tighter security on the border with china and north korea, and are you expecting -- [unintelligible]

>> whatever the deer leader decides to do is of to him. i think if he does trouble to china he will hear the same message he heard from the ambassador last month. >> [inaudible] >> there are reports he was being movedççv: to the provin. yj

xdçmanagerççç raging minists supposed toñrko be sworn in|w3] minister that is;ç supposed to e sworn in tomorrow? çok[ççççxdçói]ççw3çççn 1999u!xd --çç can you talk abw it relatesu! toçqym u.s., indon defense andçw3 diplomats? >> i would beç happy to take tt question. t(çççw3okç[ç[captioning y national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] i]>> the new c-span video libray is añr digital archivei]çi]ç n programming from barack obamaço ronaldç reagan and everyone in over 157,000 hours of c-span w3video now available to you. çótry it'btw3ççñr atçç c-ç.

w3çt(q>> nowç we look at how e dealing withñk#ederal funds. thisñr is about half an hour. host: jane is an assistant secretary with the department of labour and is here to talk to us about unemployment benefits. several states are saying that they expect to run not in the next couple of years. if they do, what will they do? guest: first of all, rob, thanks so much for doing this topic. we are glad to get the information to people. this was built so that the federal government would always be there to loan money to the states when they needed. president obama with the recovery act is faced with that. right now we have 26 states borrowing.

by 2012 we anticipate 40 states will be borrowing. host: the top five states that have borrowed so far according to the department of labor include california, michigan, new york, ohio, and pennsylvania. california at the top with nearly $6 billion. pennsylvania at nearly $2 billion. where is the money coming from? does the federal government seriously expect the state ever to pay the money back? guest: there is no question that right now the anticipation is that all of the states will pay it back. they pay back over the years. probably up until about 2020. it is no surprise the five stages mentioned are once hard hit by unemployment. they have had industries not only downsized believe, as with michigan.

michigan has been in double- digit unemployment for over a year. through no fault of their own these states are in a position where they are out of money. the base wage employers pay into the u.i. trust fund has not changed in 25 years. when you have more using benefits and have not increased the amount of revenue, you'll come up with the situation short on funds. the federal government is there. nobody goes without benefits. host: is a strictly for benefits or can be used for retraining as well? guest: no, strictly for benefits to qualified workers who have lost their jobs. host: this is jane oates of the department of labor and we would like to get involved in the conversation.

we have a special number this morning for those unemployed, 628-0814. you can also send us thmessage s by e-mail and by twitter. what is the average amount of time people spinning unemployed? guest: right now it is about 20 weeks. november is the latest month we have the most correct information on. to give you a sense how tough that is, in november 2008 it was 18 weeks. host: in the state subdue the benefits extend to 28 weeks? guest: each is different. each has at least 26 weeks. the average now the states

having more is up to about 35. the most weeks you can collect is 99. people should check with their own state. you will have a map available on your website. that changes weekly. in the recovery act of the president put it in an extended an emergency money. again, the extended benefits depend on the unemployment within your own state. callers can check yours or our website or call us. anywhere between 26 and 99 weeks. host: pat on the line for democrats. caller: i am a progressive democrat. i am extraordinarily concerned about the ridiculous length of

time we are allowing unemployment benefits to be extended. there is a zero incentive for people to go look for employment when you're given this card barge extraordinarily long time to be on the dole. in a political operative. i have noticed that major corporations are manipulating construct to keep unemployment high sticking give another republican back in the office. i guarantee the want to keep unemployment beyond 10% in order to assault the president of the united states. i hope people wake up and see what corporate america is doing. guest: things for your comments. i understand. many people are questioning --

might on ties are with norlannon ireland. the dole is the word used there. the. u.i. but if it is $380 per week. this replaces about one-third of the wages they were making. when i go around the country i hear people who would do anything to get a job. a year very few stories about people saying please keep me on unemployment clunker. people are nervous, anxious. there are so many people in the country who have never been unemployed before and never dreamed they would be in. we look at the fact that they cannot pay their mortgages. i hear and respect your opinion, but the people i hear would give it anything to get off unemployment and to get a good

job. will be watching for fraud cases. if anyone is offered a job and does not take it -- that is fraud. we go after them to repay their unemployment. if they are not actively looking for work and we find out about that through our random audits, they are really removed from the rolls and have to repay unemployment. we are trying to be diligent about going after those. about going after those. i would ask you to really host: our next call comes from james in georgia. you are unemployed? caller: i am unemployed. host: how long have you been unemployed famines -- unemployed devl famines -- unemployed?

>> since january 28. when the benefits came out and we got letters from the department of labor, it only said there was eligible for seven weeks, and once i got laid off i decided to go back to school to get retrained, and i was just wondering if there was anything in the latest bill with extensive benefits for everybody, particularly theçó ñ been displays and are in school trying to get retrained? ?/> host: james, hold on. you were told you would get seven weeks? caller: yes, after congress

passed the 13-week extension. host: or a seven-week extension of what you already had? caller: yes, an extension. i think i only received 50% of the benefits. host: on the map. says that georgia has up to 99 weeks of potential unemployment insurance. guest: yes, for some of your callers with individual questions by james we would be willing to get back to them to talk about their specifics. he made a great decision to go back to school to get retrained. i would strongly urge him to look at his training provider. to see if he is eligible for a pell grant. they are available to anyone who has not already gotten a four-

year degree. for the can help not only with tuition, but books and fees and transportation. host: next up is tacoma on the line for republicans. caller: i think the extensions on unemployment to 99 weeks is way too much. i think it hinders the problem and makes it worse. people are getting complacent. i owned a small lansky business. i'm fine and hard to get the guys who were working for me back. -- by own a small landscape

business. they are happy with the way things are. they know in a long time until runs out. they're happy with the way things are. host: washington is one of those states with up to 99 weeks. guest: yes, i respect both mike and pat in thinking that 99 weeks is too long. especially with mike saying he could not get people to return to work for his landscaping business. the fact is more americans than ever went back to seasonal farmworker over the summer. we do guest permits. everyone from college students to adults were picking fruit last summer. they could not get another job. to employers like mike if you cannot find people, please list york jobs with our one-stop

centers. host: the department of labor has a national call center. 1-877-us2jobs. who isñi this number for and wht kind of information will they get? guest: it is a help line for people having trouble with their benefits. if they have specific questions it is hard to give the answer. the job they had before there were displaced, how many weeks the worked -- all of that is different from state to state. one example. sometimes if your partner or

spouse is transferred by their job and you transferred along with them in some states to would be eligible for unemployment, but not in others. those things are really good questions. for those are good for the help line. if i moved from pennsylvania to minnesota what are my options in terms of benefits? host: next up is atlanta, georgia on the line for independents. caller: i have been unemployed for 13 months and have sent out hundreds of resonatumes. the department of labor requires your full day of birth including the year. i thought that was illegal. am i incorrect? many jobs i applied for her, and require you to inser answer wher

you are above four years old. many are recruited by at &t and that company requires your social security number. the pell grant is wonderful, but i have a degree and have a computer programmer and can i get a job. i want to take continuing education courses, but i can't take those takea pell grant because those don't have credit associated with them. guest: first of all, mark, my heart is really out to you about being unemployed for 13 months. it is difficult. if you have a bachelor's degree you are not eligible for a pell grant.

i suggest going to the one-stop which is operated in conjunction with the georgia department of labor, but by the federal government, and find other opportunities available for retraining or retooling. with your computer schools in not need a lot. maybe just a different software program or familiarity with different networks. additionally, the department of labour in january will put out $500 million in training grant money. it is competitive money. it will not be in every area. but for those with difficulty and looking for training opportunity, keep watching your newspapers. to grants in your local areas will be great opportunities. green and emerging jobs, allied health -- many of those will be about i.t.

we will announce one grant per week for the month of january. we will probably award 50 or 60 grants. i hope we will hit every state as long as each state applied. host: how is the unemployment program set up? who is responsible for making sure those who are unemployed get the money? guest: it is a cooperative effort between the federal government and the states. the states are ultimately responsible for making certain workers get the check they deserve. the federal government as the backlog, the loans. but also bringing states together along with associations to get best practices out there. especially with technology. you will hear some problems states have had implementing the new extension programs because

of their antiquated technology. the states are working on that. our role is to help them get the most they can without an insurgents of new money. host: our next call comes from green bay, wisconsin. trevor is unemployed. caller: hello. during the election process obama talked about not find a free trade agreements. i was wondering why nothing has been mentioned about that since he has taken office? host: how long have you been unemployed? what you think free trade has something to do with it? caller: because we are competing with the slave labor force in china, indonesia, and

all those other countries. when you are paying someone 50 cents per day it is hard to compete with someone at minimum wage at $7 per hour. host: what kind of job were you doing? caller: i am a carpenter. guest: i'm not the expert on free-trade, but i can tell you one positive thing president obama did. last summer he put a tax on tires. that was a brave stance. i was with senator brown from ohio when it happened. all of us think of ohio as the tire couple of the u.s. because of that tariff on chinese altair's folks in ohio had already seen an increase in production. there were two employers who not only stop layoffs, but brought workers by. i agree that if we make our products a bit more competitive we can get americans back to

work. also, i would say our folks in commerce and trade and the export/import bank have been working with small employers and mid-sized ones to get them to realize that if they try to do business outside the u.s. borders to compete globally with american-made products, it would also create jobs. those guys could probably give you some impressive good news already in the first year of obama's presidency. embassador kirk has been doing a 01-man show. they have been doing a wonderful job getting the message out. i encourage you to have them on the show about what they're doing. it is a great way to increase productivity. more businesses are looking into

that. host: next up is michael in baltimore. caller: 01 to let folks know what they're the people who are on unemployment are not just sitting around eating bon bons. unemployment does not cut it at all. a get the maximum. i have been unemployed for six months. i get $410 per week. i was making $49 per week and was a six-figure earner. there might be a small population of their milking the system, but it cannot be for much. there were probably not an insignificant amounts. -- i was making $1,400 per week previously. i'm even looking for jobs in over-qualified for. we have not talked about the o

under-employed people. guest: you are exactly right. there are 15 million unemployed and 10 million are eligible to collect. there are another 9 million working part-time were still actively looking for full-time jobs. i am so glad when unemployed people who are the consummate all the time call to and to let people know this is not a great situation. going from $1,400 per week like michael unfortunately, for many we're not making" we were and our mortgage, credit card balances all reflect that. you have such a reduction in your weekly income and that seriously impacts your life style. that is not taking a vacation. host: this message by twitter

asks if there's any change in the average benefit of new claims. guest: there is. sprthe average benefit has remad pretty constant among states. $293 is the national average for a weekly claim. things that would change that are the levels of people getting unemployed. michael from baltimore said he made it $1,300 per week and is eligible for $410. even though there are higher wage people being displaced in the recession, because michael is looking at jobs his over- qualified for, they're pushing out low-wage workers. the numbers of low-wage workers being displaced is pushin