added tax. >> we made a decision in november not to go ahead with that. in fact, the party that has done this is the conservative party. they raised it to 17.5%. they have imposed that many times. >> was it not under a labour government that this was created? doesn't the prime minister agreed that the british soldiers from all political parties joined our forces the about the cold war to defeat -- to the soviets. >> prime minister, -- len >> i

think it is important >> mr. speaker, i think it's important, i mean, i think it's important in this house that people recognize whether there is agreement and where there is not. and there is agreement on our membership of nato. there was agreement on what we had to do to end the cold war. there's been agree but that we need to finance our defense forces more, and there has been agreement that we need to take action in iraq and afghanistan. and i got to say for the conservatism to reduce big issues to medical, shows just how juvenile their behavior in this house is. >> norm becker. smack it is unfair on real passengers for carbon reduction, the cost of motoring has decreased by 14% while the cost of real first have gone up in real terms by 13%. given the large reason for this

is the government's policy of forcing of inflation every single year. can he now get a house in the country give an assurance, if the government is reluctant to in this rbi plus one policy and then their train as go to? >> mr. speaker, the railways are carrying more passengers and more frank than ever since the second world war. and will be announcing plans to mark to expand our railways and to make sure we have the most modern railways for the future. and i believe the passengers welcome the fact that not only have we better trained services but trains arrive on time. i think it's important to recognize the huge investment that this government has made in the railways of this country. >> is my right honorable friend aware of integers campaign of them undermining of public service and the bbc in particular? as the goes to a general election, will reaffirm that this government supports public service broadcasting and the

bbc? >> mr. speaker, what worries me more is the conservative campaign to undermine the bbc and british telecom. and the conservatives have made an announcement that put at risk the future of digitalization and broadband in this country. we're determined that everyone in this country has access to broa on wednesday, it will air at 8:00 a.m. eastern. at c-span.org, you can find links to the house of commons and the prime minister's website. >> coming up next, a speech by

the prime minister and the global economy. after that, the eu commission and the new health care in 2010 elections. >> the health-care debate moves to the house budget committee. we have live coverage on c-span 3. the budget meeting is part of a matter of putting it to vote. but rules committee will meet on wednesday to work out the structure for the debate. house speaker nancy pelosi says

that she hopes to start the debate on thursday with boats later in the week. stay tuned for the latest on the health care debate and visit our health care of the. you can read the legislation, see what the president and members of congress are saying and join in the conversation yourself on twitter. you can also find hundreds of hours of video from the house and senate floor debates, committee hearings, markups and other events. >> at an event in london, british prime minister gordon brown addressed the global economy and the four-year plan to cut the deficit in half. one of the key points in the budget report that is scheduled to be released on march 24. he also spoke of the upcoming british relaxin -- british work

-- british election. this is about an hour. i just want to make a few alterations. welcome, everybody. a thank-you for joining us. this is another fascinating and a timely newsmaker event. in the last few weeks, we have had three party leaders here to make news. it has been a fascinating moment as we go through what can only be described as the twilight zone of the pre- election campaign -- . i was just telling gordon that he has honored as on so many occasions. he now qualifies for his unsecured be passed. he can slip and on known.

-- he can slip in unknown. this morning, the prime minister will speak with you for amount of time he chooses. then you will have the usual q&a. i will moderate. gordon, the floor is yours -- or, the podium. [applause] >> i will not try to pretend that i was not concerned.

i was. it was the biggest economic crisis in the war. we got the sense of emergency. it became a global financial crisis so profound that it raised fundamental questions, not just about established economic orthodoxies, but the balance between the organizations and institutions. when i first came to parliament, i never imagined that i would have to nationalize the major building society and put up 50 billion pounds of public money to buy up majority control in two of the world's biggest banks. all we need to do -- and then have to agree to a very stringent fiscal stimulus.

neither could i have imagined a huge step forward in global economics. china, india, brazil, south africa, and other matching economies with the g-it back together to fix a global economic system. alistair darling and the work with our international partners for a fighting chance. it was one of the greatest test of character. with hindsight, we see just how close the world came to a complete meltdown. in the space of just over six months, nearly four years of economic growth was wiped out. in 18 months, the world stock market fell by over 50%. but this was not just about

numbers. the human costs has been all too real with millions of jobs lost around the world. during the recession, alistair darling and i have made difficult decisions that have tested our results. but we have stuck to them -- our resolve. but we have stuck to them. i said we would take action to restructure the banks, help small businesses with cash flow, and we did. i said we would take action to reinvigorate the national economy and we have. while we were hit with a great recession, we now know that the world has indeed avoided a great depression. we avoided that depression not by accident, but by design, by learning from the mistakes made in previous recessions. we promised immediate and real help for families and

businesses. we did what we said we would do. i know that many have suffered, but unemployment in the united kingdom group for less than predicted. the number of small businesses is now growing with a number of private-sector enterprises in britain. but we know that domestic action the loan was never went to be enough. the problems were global. the solutions had to be global, too. in the autumn of 2008 and on the eve of the g-20 summit last april, i was all too aware that, unless we act quickly and decisively, we could be hit again by an economic slump from which it would take years to recover. i attended a great many summits, but i have never been so acutely conscious of the eyes of the financial markets, but the whole

world anxiously waiting that we could begin to restore confidence. i believe that the measures we agree to that they did indeed make a difference and did market turning point in confidence. let's be clear today. although the economy is now growing, recovery is still in its early stages. it remains very fragile. there will be many months ahead of conflicting statistics and mixed signals. we have reached a crossroads in our response to the global economic challenge. analysis by the international monetary fund shows that, if we repair and reform the financial system, invest in jobs, and bring down trade barriers, we can return to the world growth rate of 5% per year and do so on a more secure basis. but if we make the wrong decisions, then the imf

estimates that growth rate could be 2% a year lower. this could cost the world $6 trillion in output and cost up to two hundred million jobs worldwide. so the progress we have already made will not relax our villages or results. -- or resulresolve. we know the world has a lot more to do to increase investment and get trade moving and to bring down unemployment. in my view, we are nearly there to repair much of the global financial system. but there is nothing preordained or automatic about the downturn. while we have come through the worst of this dreadful storm, the waters are still choppy. we must be alive to them here in the traces we will make in the coming months are probably just

as important and just as urgent for families, jobs, mortgages, and businesses as the choices we made to protect them at the height of the storm. i believe that, around the world, we have to rediscover that sense of urgency and collective ambition that guided us a year ago. it is our choices and the wisdom and the resolve and judgments we make to bear in making them of -- at both a national and global level that will secure a recovery and in the pants -- and indispensable reforms to safeguard our future. do we wreckage list -- three recklessly put it to reverse the monetary policy of the last two years and risk putting our economy back into recession? or do continue to support the private sector economy until it becomes self sustaining? do we drive through radical reform at a global level that ensures we never see a repeat of

ensures we never see a repeat of the crisi do we follow through the int'l process as agreed in pittsburgh to rebuild the economy on consistent principles and practice. do we've retreat to the national market's or do we push forward with not just more, but better globalization. do we let it be overwhelmed by a program, regardless of circumstances, or do we hold firm to our carefully constructed plan? we will continue to element this step by step. . servants? with arbitrary cuts or protect those from one services and reduce the deficit by taking

tough and fair decisions on spending and tax on other parts of our economy? it would strike a balance between supporting the economy and reducing the recession. there is a contract between the government and the british people that says more than half the debt as it over next four years. we will set out in more detail in the budget how we deliver on our commitment to restore the public finances while protecting the fundamental public services we depend on. our approach is clear. we will not be diverted from them. we have national tax increases that will be fair to protect hospitals, schools, and policing. this will include forcing all

government departments to make real and lasting efficiency savings. every single taxpayers penney's will be wisely deployed. part of our tough approach on spending will be a tough approach to paying in the public sector. last week, i said that the parliamentary salaries would be frozen. we must take in a plea disciplined approach to pay and benefits across all sectors. after the reports of the review by is, we will also frees the days of senior staff in the civil shot, senior staff in the military, and the pay of consultants, the peace, and dentists. all with new controls, we will save money immediately. we will save more than $3 billion pounds.

unlike the policies of the 1980's and 1990's were texas for the wealthiest people since i came down as the burden -- where the taxes for the wealthiest people came down, they will take the greatest strain. it does not make sense to me to count tax credits from millions of middle-class families while offering a state taxes. for the final essential element of our plan to reduce the deficit is to get the economy growing faster. growth rate and drug rings in demand and reduces the weight and cost of unemployment -- growth rate and jobs

brings in demand and reduces the weight and cost of unemployment. we have rejected from the outset the laissez-faire approach that would have let the recession take its course. it is why we are investing now in the industries of the future. in the last three years, we have had trusted to make. whether to leave the status quo as it was with long planning delays and uncertainties for investors were taking on the importance to build for the future and create more flexible planning environment with a new planning commission to make strategic national decisions? our choice is clear and we have already set out the planning from four ports, and it did, and infrastructure in the future. -- set out the planning for ports, investment, and

infrastructure in the future. we had a choice to cut back the student and apprenticeships numbers during the recession or to raise them in preparation for the recovery. in making these important choices, the right the difficult decisions were made to build for the future. we have modernized the port for british exporters by making incentives to further encourage the growth of small businesses, building on the unprecedented increase in the number of entrepreneurs in this country since the 1990's. we have choices and to enhance our relationship with the rest of europe. we will not jeopardize british jobs and british growth by satisfying the reactionary impulse to muscle their cells from europe where 60% of our

trade now -- imposed to isolate ourselves from europe where 60% of our trade now lives. i believe in britain's future. broadband britain can be a world leader. high-speed rail britain, i've written that is capable -- high- speed rail britain, opening up the possibility of social mobility in the postwar era. this belief in britain's future is why we are modernizing the incentives and improving the way we supervise digital enterprise and communications. we are offering $1 billion pounds in incentives and support so that britain can become a will leaving digital economy as quickly as possible. over the last 10 years, we have

doubled the budget for science and we are encouraging partnerships between businesses and universities and scientific inventors and creating a $325 million pounds innovation fund even during a recession to exploit the best of our country. this belief and britain's future -- this belief in britain's future will find new ways to provide [unintelligible] this belief in britain's future is why we will support new frameworks to stimulate new clear and clean energy generation and why we are investing more to become a world leader in a $3 trillion pounds market for low-carb and environmental goods and services. -- for low-car and carbon envirl

goods and services. high-speed rail is a symbol of our visions for britain and the economic growth and prosperity we hope to deliver to our children. these are critical domestic, economic decisions. the new basis of an investor partnership between business and government, designed to secure their recovery and build a strong and sustainable growth, is financed while we continue to cut the deficit by half. we must also ensure that, on a global basis, the recovery is balanced and sustainable. apart from britain stand -- from britain stepping back, we mucst inject a new urgency into the

delivery of the international agreements we have been put his opinion. the world will all too easily the fall to all parents. i believe there is now a real risk -- to old patterns. i believe there is now a real risk. all the global economies will experience a loss with low growth and low employment. we must now make a reality the breakthroughs we agreed to in pittsburgh with of the g-20. it was the first genuine attempt by countries to coordinate and commit to change the national economic policies and to aim for higher and sustainable growth worldwide. as it was said, without such coordination, countries'

individual economic forecasts will suffer. together with a reformed imf, the agreement in pittsburgh is the first step for international economic governance. now is the time to turn the blueprint into concrete action. europe has already been looking at how as a union it can work on this. countries grapple with how best to have grease regain its market confidence. our duty falls to realize the its burger court, reducing and balances to sustainable levels, -- the pittsburgh accord, reducing the balances to sustainable levels. this framework would be one of three acid tests for

international economic cooperation in 2010. the second is financial regulation. the foundation of the new global banking system must be a consistent economic regime. of course, a timetable for implementation of such rules must be carefully calculated and calibrated to the face of a recovery -- to the pace of recovery. make no mistake. over the coming years, we will need to introduce, gradually add taking into the account -- taking into account the needs of the real economy, much more and higher quality capital.

this will do more than anything else to prevent a new crisis. the process up recapitalization must be finished. -- the process of recapitalization must be finished. i want britain to have the highest standard of supervision in the world, one that is able to compete on a level playing field against other financial centers. we must never forgets that it was the taxpayer that prevented the collapse of the banking system. we will ensure that the taxpayer recoups it. of course, we cannot act in a vacuum. the costs have been and will be different country to country. the approach with up will also defer. that does not mean we can afford an incoherent approach

internationally which risks banks taking a advantage of differences between countries where regulation is that the most lax. britain has always been at the forefront of this debate. i set out the need for a new relationship between the banks and society. the principles that should govern the process, in order to deliver a more fair balance between risk and reward, since then, number of countries have set out their idea that specific proposals. the imf is continuing its work to report -- to prepare a report by april. we should build on the ideas that have emerged in the large financial sectors and achieve consensus on an approach. first, and levy on banks seemed to be the most practical approach. it should be designed to go

with necessary reform. third, any levy should support globalization and avoid double taxation of international banks. the proceeds should be for national governments to use, either to put it aside in a fund or to reduce public debt. we need to work actively with the g-20 to forge a national consistent approach. now is the time for the g-20 leaders to recommit themselves to the ambitious agenda we have already set and to go further by making clear that we will adopt a shared approach to a range of measures necessary to produce systemic risk and to ensure that the financial sector makes its fair contribution, recognizing the cumulative effect of these the cumulative effect of these -- the third test for the international community and the

2-20 is a renewed focus on trade. -- bj 20 -- the g20 summit. this would be worth $170 billion annually. there would be no backsliding two years ago -- backsliding. but two years ago, we could not travel the final mile. we will need to do this if we get agreement. we should all shape this agreement. not only should we do this, but we must go further again. we must focus on new sources of growth. not these low carbon industries and technology. we must invest in low-income countries to spread prosperity

so that they can become successful. we are at a turning point where our domestic economic recovery makes us choose that recovery is assured. assured. economy back into recession threatening the jobs, homes, and businesses we fought to protect from the toxic winds of the great global recession. but it would be just as dangerous for our own prospects to fail to deliver the urgent global growth strategy we now need and to fail to complete the

work of bank restructuring. both are essential for strong, balanced, and sustainable growth across the world. just as before, the response of this government will be swift and unwavering to do whatever it takes to protect the recovery, advance the global reforms, and achieve balanced and sustainable growth for the future for them -- for families and businesses in britain. and because it is right in principle and for our economy, we will work for a prosperity across the world that will fuel prosperity in our own country. i have heard some people that this coming -- say that this coming election will be about policy choices. others say it will be about character. i don't think we can separate the two. it is for other people to judge. i think this is not about telling people what they want to hear but what we need to do. it is about having courage make

tough decisions and stick to them without being blown off course even when the going is difficult. what you see with me is what you get. the stakes are high, but we dare not risk the recovery. our task above all else is to preserve and lift the standards of life of the british people. we are weathering the storm. now was no time to turn back. we will hold to our course and we will complete this mission. we've gotten through this storm together but there are still substantial risks ahead. there will be bumps in the road and i believe the only way to overcome them is by displaying the same strength and resolve as we did during the crisis. i will not let you down. thank you.

>> you know have questions -- we will now have questions. gordon, sometime in the next few months, the british people decided they want a fourth labou governmentr would you as its leader. if that happens -- the fourth labour government with u.s. its leader. what would you like to be remembered for were smart -- i will see this is the first government of the new global era. we need to think about how britain can succeed in this new global era. in the last two years, we've had to weather a global storm.

in the next five years, what we can do is build the growth, jobs, and industries of the future. i have just explained how confident i am in the digital broadband, in the creative industry, and the advanced manufacturing, and the biotechnology, and the los sector -- low carbon sectors of our economy. we will have a mobile economy, creating more skilled jobs in the future, and create possibilities and mobility for people over time. i think that britain will see as a result of these policies, a briton were all areas are capable of growth, with the financial sector is as important as it has been but we will have a more balanced economy around it. i think you can see that growth coming forward. new jobs, new growth, new industries that britain can specialize in -- we have already

got a central economy and we are able to sell to the rest of the world. in china and asia and india, i can see the patterns changing as a result of that, but we are very well placed and orchestrating an economy with far more global reach them before. and if you look at british industry, the investments is for the result of the future. i see is developing new industries and new jobs. i think it will be a different kind, but it will be more sustainable. >> we're here in the heart of one of the world's great financial centers. this audience is particularly interested in hearing what you want to hear in the -- what you want to do in the future to protect, strengthen, and sustain

the competitiveness of britain. >> our leadership in the financial sector is something that is not just a feature of our past but is a feature of our future. we're making -- companies are making decisions about where they will be located all the time. but the advantages we have are very real indeed. we're at the center with the english language, very strong legal and business services around the financial sector, we're leading in many of the market's, even after the problems of the recession, and i think we set high standards and at the same time avoid a competitive race to the bottom. one of the ways that we have to succeed in new york, london, and paris, is that we cannot allow a race to the bottom based on

lowest standards. that is what the banking reforms are trying to do, and also with the stability board is trying to do as well. create a platform of standards which all countries which follow, in this interconnected world, where you have one standard operating around the world and the firms themselves don't have to deal with a host of regulations. this will benefit the city of london and i am determined in the european negotiations to get the benefits as well. >> we are all human beings. chairman and chief executives make mistakes, as the prime ministers. when you look back with hindsight, what the lessons you

have word from the mistakes to have made? >> show me a soldier that has made no mistakes and i will show you know -- a soldier that has won no battles. you have to look back on the decisions that have been taken and see whether you can do things better in the future. as for financial regulation was concerned, my greatest regret is that i was pushing in 1997 after the asian crisis in particular for a global system of supervision for the interconnectedness of the financial system would be reflected in some form of global cooperation. and we set up the financial stability forum, but we never could get the global cooperation that was necessary.

what happened was that you had subprime products given to letting -- aaa ratings in america, coming to europe, being seen by the european regulators. if we had a far better system of coordinating our approach, i think we would have done better. i think that dynamism of markets is something we must extend, and governments -- we've got to share our cells -- sell our shares and our banks, but that global cooperation is quite fundamental. if you have a globalized economize, a global source of goods, global communications, then you must have the means by which the global community cooperates to deal with problems. if you do not, we will have the problems that you've got. you have trade and

protectionism, and you see it and climate change. if you cannot cooperate globally in a world that is global, you will pay a very heavy price in the future. my message is that we have to have the same urgency that we had a year ago about building the global financial supervision that could only be done it nations cooperate together. the big lesson i think i have learned is that global problems need global solutions. >> you talk about the importance of trade and the concerns about protectionism. we feel the sharpest in the united states. what would you say to the democratic president to help them to intervene in the protectionism that is growing? >> the have the speech in front of you when you give it, but when you speak to congress, they

already have the written text of your speech and know when to applaud and not to applaud, when the stand up and it is standing applause. i noticed a great deal of silence when he mentioned the need to avoid protectionism and to sign a new trade deal. it is the right thing to do. i do think that in the fact -- last few weeks people have started to understand that trade is the engine of growth and it is not pulling its weight. people now see as i said in my speech that while we were close to getting an agreement a few years ago -- basically an argument between india and america about whether india could stop excessive imports when trade was running fast, and it could not reach an agreement on that. i think that problem can be solved and that was the one problem that prevented an accord

there. but that we have to look at the mentalities of the trade agreement -- the modalities of the trade agreement. it would be a very important signal to all that we are determined to avoid protectionism and to growth for. what i have been -- and to move growth all word -- forward. i think we're back on an agenda to get a deal in the next few months. we have to work harder but i think it will be important and i think america will welcome it. >> if you have a question, can i ask you to get a microphone in your hand because this is being recorded. >> i'm the editor of reuters. the currency market has settled a lack of confidence in britain at the moment -- has signaled a

lack of confidence you say you want to make tough decisions, -- spending freezes -- and how can you get a key election document in the weeks to come? >> i'm absolutely determined about it. and now is in law, the deficit reduction plan. i think people are asking us -- make sure that the recovery happens and is secure. and then take the decisions that are necessary without interfering with growth and without interfering in the basic frontline services to get that deficit reduction happening. our four-year deficit reduction our four-year deficit reduction plan is based on tax changes, we expect to grow well out of this recession.

we worry about the level of european growth at the moment because our export market is so attached to europe, but we are taking the tax measures, and we are taking the spending measures that are necessary. we have a determination to do this. we have already announced changes in public-sector pensions. we have cut back in the running of government departments, and we have already said there will be departments who will have their budgets cut. these uncertainties, are because unemployment is actually lower than expected -- these uncertainties are because unemployment is actually lower. they are working in our favor, and if we set spending figures now for each department, we would be basing the figures that are not absolutely clear because of what has happened to unemployment and to the debt interest, but this is legally binding, and i think it is

clear, and i think the markets should understand that. could i just say something? our debt levels were lower than the rest of the g-7 countries as we came into this recession, and we are about 10% lower than france and germany and lower than america and certainly lower than japan and italy, and ours will rise to something similar to that of america and france and germany over a next period of time, and it was right for us to use deficit financing to make sure that the economy could recover quickly, but our debt is structured in a way that the average maturity is about 13 years. but art that is structured so that the average maturity is about 13 years. it is a lot longer maturity than in other countries. we have 50-year bonds that have been taken up. if you look at the pattern of our debt, it is not similar to

that of other countries. far longer term and we have been able to finance it on that basis without the same amount of rollover needed by other countries. and because the financing that that is still lower than when we came to power. even though it has risen, we initially took that down. but we've seen that debt rising due to the recession. we have a plan to deal with that of the next several years. we've got a clearer idea of what we're going to do about that. >> the gentleman here. >> sam hill. is maintaining that aaa credit rating for the u.k. government crucial to your government in the future? >> i believe that we will maintain that aaa credit rating.

i don't think it helps to give running commentary on these things. neither on their rumors and the forecasts that come about one debt rating agencies. i believe that we are taking the most ambitious measures to reduce that deficit of any of the g-7 countries. if you look at our deficit reduction plan, it is more radical than that deficit reduction plans of other countries. i also believe that people can see that we are going for growth in this economy as well. we can grow out of this recession. in the 1980's and 1990's, it was 50% interest rates, 10% interest rate for four years, high inflation that they could not cope with. that is not a problem at this moment. we can grow our way of this

recession. the oilers the gentleman here. -- >> the gentleman here. i tend to be looking here. >> you talk about the deficit reduction plan. you talk optimistically about unemployment not being as low as you thought. the bonus tax that you have imposed on some people in this room will bring in more money than you thought. given the concern of the markets and the deficit reduction plan, can you give assurance that any extra revenue will go to deficit reduction and not go on to extra spending on the giveaways that

some people might like to see you offer? >> i think it should be absolutely clear that we will stick to that deficit reduction plan. it is a four-year plan to more than halve the deficit and it is our intention to see it through in the way that we have set out. yes, there are uncertainties in different areas. we don't know what interest rates are likely to be at certain points and we do not know what unemployment levels are likely to be. we have been successful at keeping that low. we do not know how this will fare in the next several months. but i can give absolute assurance that we will stick to our four-year deficit reduction plan. and i have a good track record in doing what i say. i said that would freeze public spending until we were in a position to see how the economy was moving forward, and in the last spending round, we cut more

than seven departments when i was chancellor. the tough decisions have got to be made but i would say to you all that we're not going to withdraw stimulus until the recovery is assured. we're not going to the mag -- make the mistake of the 1930's when people are recovery was a short and withdrew that stimulus or whatever they had to keep the economy moving forward and things got worse. we know that there are difficulties in different parts of the world. there is a great deal of uncertainty and we need to make sure that we secure the recovery. we will secure recovery and then we will make sure that deficit reduction plan takes place in the way that we have stated. >> the hand back there, a sort of pressure. -- gray shirt. >> i'm from reuters.

at what stage can you tell the british people that they will seek real cuts in public spending that they will feel, even if you can save frontline services? >> i think what people see most visibly and public services, because of a long history we have had in supporting health care, that the front line health care services are maintained and improved. we've got a program for securing guarantees to people, cash payments if they are not able to get that care for cancer care or getting operations within 18 weeks come on weekends and evenings for free health -- we're not calling to cut the school services at this time

because we believe that raising the standards of schools is absolutely crucial. there are very few young people that cannot afford to leave school without a skill. we have to make sure that when people leave education, they have something that they can build upon. education has been raised 18%, and that is full time education, so they will have the skills that are vital for the future. in other areas, we will make strong efficiency savings. we're prepared to cut other department budgets to maintain our priorities in these areas. i think we have already announced reforms in the way that central government works and dealing with public sectors and pensions, and you'll see more announcements in the next few weeks. we will reform government to deal with the problems.

you will see substantial changes in the way we organize government in the future as well. >> the lady in the back. >> wide you think that the weak pound is failing to reduce exports? -- produce exports? >> i think it is obvious what is happening. european economy, our major source of growth, is not growing fast enough. if you have 60% of exports going to the european markets, and you have even with some benefits from the currency of very sluggish growth rate in these areas, it's easy to say. we wish to expand exports to china. we're working closely with india. india wants to build 1000 universities of the next few years and we can be part of that amazing program of education expansion.

but the fact is that we've got to get the world talking together about how each continent and contributed -- can contribute to the growth. there are issues of trade imbalances and reserves by different countries -- all of these are holding back the growth that we need to see in the world economy. i think that is the worry that i have at the moment. i think we will get -- we could get insufficient growth in the rest of the world. >> right here. >> you mentioned in your speech that policy and character went together. and that they would both be part of the electoral campaign. your character has been in focus for the last few months. what gives you confidence that you can win the battle of

character with david cameron? >> it is not for me to judge the final outcome of this, but the british people. [laughter] but i look for to put our achievements to the british people. for the last two years, we've been living and the world of referendum -- and the world of referendum, were you criticize the government for this are not doing that. now we're in the world of choice. people have to make up their mind -- do they want to put the country at risk or not? do they want to have a party that has had 10 different position and keeps changing its mind? do they want to do best to secure the growth and industry of the future? i don't see an industrial policy coming from the conservative or from the liberal party. do we want to play our part in

europe or do we want to withdraw and be on the fringes again, have a battle about things that are long gone as issues in the european union, simply reopened for the sake of ideology? when i say the policy and character code to weather -- together, is about what you have a clearer idea about what you want to do, what you are determined to push that through, and whether you are sufficiently patient and strong will to push aside the barriers that stand in your way? over these last two years, we have pushed the world into a position from britain where we have a better outcome then we could reasonably have expected from the events that were catastrophic two years ago. now we have a different task and it is urgent -- to maintain the recovery and secure it, but also build the jobs in industries of the future, and i think i have a clear idea what we need to do. in the end, it will be put the

british people to decide and that is why i welcome the chance to do that in the next few months. >> only time for two or three more questions, so the gentleman there. >> russell lynch. could you rule out any rises a vat? >> we had a debate about this and we decided to raise national insurance that pays for some services. we ruled out the vat. the party that is keen on the vat, the conservatives, so perhaps your question should be directed to them. >> niall. >> prime minister, what would you say is your greatest policy ever since 1997. >> i would say what i said earlier.

the grid is policy error was not to push forward with global cooperation at the time when the haitian crisis had revealed the necessity. we tried to persuade the americans, we sent proposals around the world, we created financial stability for them, but it was not strong enough for good enough. if you are looking at economic policy over the last 12 years, it is clouded by the fact to have a global economy, global flows of capital, global sources of goods, global communications, into related, interconnected, and tangled banking systems that come right across the world, but you do not have progress that you should of had in global supervision. this is the lesson we learned on climate change and a lesson on nuclear weapons, a lesson we are learning on terrorism, in every single area affecting economic and environmental and security activities. the pace at which globalization

has happened has not been has happened has not been matched by the pace at and so, yes, i can look at it and what i have done wrong, but looking at the global society, what has disappointed me is that we were not able to get the cooperation on all of these major issues in the best way possible, and that need institutional change to do so. we finally got a g-20 to deal with the economy, but that was a real push that we had to make a last year. people do not see that unless you have that degree of global cooperation, then people will be considering national policies at the expense of other nations without realizing that if they cooperate, in mid but -- it need not be a zero sum game, so that is what i have gathered from looking at this over the last 12 years. in trade and security and nuclear-weapons discussions, and

clearly in the financial regulation of the global economy. >> ok, one last question. there are some ladies in the back. the lady in purple. or is it blue? i cannot see. >> the budget today, it is just six weeks before the election. it will be a budget giveaway because you do not have the money to do that? >> it is the chancellor that is announcing the budget, and we are also announcing today, what we are doing on public-sector pay, so you can see that the announcements are in line with the very tough deficit-reduction plan -- and we are also announcing today what we are doing on public-sector pay. servants and doctors, general practitioners, and others. all these things are being done. but that deficit reduction plan that is concrete to halve the

deficit over four years, but we also want to grow jobs for the british economy. we have the means and our economy, the strength and low carbon industry and digital industries, the strength and biotechnology and all the creative energies, for us to -- created industries, to lead the world into the industry sectors in the future. and this is the first part of the global age were british can lead and create jobs for the british people in the future. >> one last question for me, if i may. t see sufficient common ground between you and the liberal democrats for you to wish to ask for their support? >> you can ask all of these questions for -- and a few months. i think every party is going to have to win this election.

thank you for asking difficult questions. you would expect me to say and it is right to say that this is a fight about our principles and our policies, and we're fighting to win. >> thank you, prime minister. i am sure it will be an exciting and a ventilation campaign. and we're [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> coming up on next, president barroso. then, a house hearing with officials from the highway traffic safety commission. the health-care debate moves to

the committee on monday as they mark up legislation. we will have live coverage beginning at 3:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3, c-span radio, and on our website at c-span.org. the budget meeting is part of the effort to put the item to a vote. democrats want to have it approved under expedited reconciliation procedures. then, the rules committee will meet on wednesday to work out the structure. house speaker nancy pelosi says she hopes to have votes later in the week. stay tuned to c-span for the latest on the health-care debate, and visit our health- care hub. see what the president and members of congress are saying, and joined in on the conversation yourself on twitter. -- and join in. there are committee hearings, markups, and other events.

c-span's health-care hub. c-span.org/healthcare/ -- c-span.org/halfealthcare. >> tim sparapani on c-span2. >> jose barraso spoke. during the second half of the hour, members' questions focused on humanitarian rights. >> the first question.

the floor is yours. >> [speaking french] >> president, this is something that we can experience. we need to have a policy that is worth its name in the international arena, and i think we should be on the right track, but i would ask you that, president. how can we say that 500 million europeans can have their rights defended? it is up to the european union to live up to its ideals and values. the action service has provided -- as provided should be coming into the light of day soon, and

we will be involved in its inception. now, the european parliament with counsel will act as co- decider. my group is very keen on the fact that the european service for external action to take full responsibility in terms of budget and policy. i look forward to your comments. thank you very much, -- >> thank you very much. this service will ensure the coherence of our foreign policy. it will allow member states to participate more and be more and more involved in the area of common, for an, and security

policy, so -- common, for in it, and security policy. -- common, foreign, and security policy. we will have a meeting at the college next thursday. we would like to have a strong european service that will be a strategic instrument that will allow for an expeditious exchange between member states and the other institutions in this area. this will be under the responsibility -- under the high representatives, and we, of course, must answer to the european parliament, and we have to look at all the aspects of this service. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, president. mr. barroso.

the euro crisis was unleashed by incorrect figures provided by greece. i would like to know from you whether you can confirm that at no point in time before the latest budget figures were supplied by the greek government you or any officers in your commission had already been informed about the correct figures, and, secondly, can you confirm that the director general had considerable doubts as early as 2004 and 2005, which she reported in relation to the

data from athens? -- which he reported? and thirdly, is it correct that the inspectors inform you that they had considerable doubts about the data from athens? >> -- is it correct that the inspectors inform you -- informed you? >> with great competence and great impartiality and great objectivity. we made the point several times, but, in fact, they put forward and regulation in the council to give powers, and this was rejected by the member states. they did not want to give the commission more powers to go in

depth in the national accounts of greece. my information is that this time at least some of those countries that voted against it, this time they said they would vote for more transparency. >> thank you very much, president. >> thank you. i have understood that one man was involved, but i was asking about a short intervention. -- about your intervention. they refused to follow your proposals, and would you tell

us, please, which heads of government were involved? >> first of all, if you asked me about blame, i do not use that name. -- if you ask me. it is because of this that we have a huge problem. regarding the commission, with my full support and the support of the college, this man performed his job in an exceptionally competent way, and it was addressed several times in meetings. regarding member states that voted against this, i cannot tell you exactly, but i knowed germany voted against it. germany said they will vote for it this time -- but i know germany voted against it. >> please. >> president, today, there is

consensus to say that we need strong economic governance in the eu. that is a huge change vis a vis the past few years. last sunday, one person stated that he was favorable to a european monetary fund. there are other proposals, other options. for example, the creation of a european debt agency, eruo bonds, or perhaps a credit agency -- euro bond. -- bonds. so we see that things are moving quickly, at least for the time being, so is it true that the commission is working on a proposal to create this european monetary fund? , as angela merkel states -- secondly, is it true, as angela

merkel states -- third, do you agree that this fund could only be a first step towards a true european treasury, which we will need in order to sustain this monetary union? >> first of all, regarding the proposal, the idea was put forth by a minister of finance and germany. the emf is a longer term proposal which may require a change. we are preparing some initiatives on economic policy coordination. we cannot at this stage exactly tell me what would be the form of this. of course, generally speaking,

we support everything that goes in favor of increased economic governments, but we have to make the proposal at the right time. having said this, the issue of the emf could not solve the urgent issue of greece. this requires -- and it is for a longer term. >> thank you very much. >> first of all, i would like to thank the president of the commission for the reply, and i would agree with him that the fund as such cannot solve the problems right away, and that is why ask that there should be various options put on the table. you have got the emf. that is a long-term project. you have got the euro bonds, which can help in the greece

case. then you have the credit rating agencies. of course, we have been working with foreign agencies -- we could have our own, and then we could have a european debt agency. we could put all of these ideas together to come up with a coherent idea from the commission rather than from member states. >> -- >> everyone is proposing different ideas, sometimes within the same government, and it is for this reason that we do not want to be hasty. we want to prepare this, and the commissioner stated this already. we will be working on the basis of a communication of coordination of economic policy and surveillance country by country within the context of the resound and perhaps also

within the general context of the european union -- within the context of the euro zone. and we do not want to work with the new proposals every day. we went to work in an objective and responsible way, which we want -- we want to work in an objective and responsible way. >> president, in view of the situation in the european union, that there is no real market or demand for gmo potatoes, for which there are alternatives, i want to ask you why you lobbied so hard? gmo potatoes were fast-tracked. i would like to have an explanation. when there is no need, what encouraged the commissioner

simply to ignore the who tests? in terms of risks, for biodiversity -- in terms of risks from biodiversity arising from gmo's -- i think this is a risky strategy which will not find acceptance among our citizens. >> thank you very much. i want to thank you. we have seen your protest. thank you very much. [applause] >> mr. president. >> the commission decided unanimously to move ahead the

authorization of this in accordance with the european law. there is something we have to respect. a considerable time has elapsed, and this deals with our independent agency with regard to food security. we want this to be thoroughly assessed. after an extensive and complete review, it was clear that there was no new scientific issues that needed further assessment, based on the opinion of our, an agency -- the opinion of our competent agency. this has been fully addressed, and i was expecting from you a word of congratulations because,

because i have announced that the commission has intention to propose the member states if you want it or not to cultivate the gmo's. when we know that there are deep differences among the states, some very much in favor and some very much against -- >> commission, president, i got no answer to the question about the need for this genetic potato, which is supposed to be supplied in greater quantity by industry. there are alternatives. why take the risk? previously, we discussed the evidence threshold i think for foods and food stocks -- food

stuffs. i would like to know whether additional authorizations are in the pipeline before the directive is in place. what is the time? >> thank you. [applause] >> mr. president. >> seen the enthusiasm of your group, i want to congratulate you -- seeing the enthusiasm of your group. any gmo -- it is clear you have the right. i do not have any position in favor or against. it depends on the opinion that is given to me by experts. i do not have any prejudiced in favor or against gmo's. and the commission has a

position. i do not see them talking about this. the commission takes a position based on other things, not because gmo's are necessary. according to the obligations, we feel obliged to accept it. if there is nothing that prevents as scientifically from doing so -- >> [[speaking foreign language] -- [speaking foreign language]

>> president, i promise you that following the gmo, my question is going to be simpler. i believe that one of the things that we should talk about is the economic situation, and i am sure that the european union citizens are far more interested in employment and jobs than in gmo potatoes. some people in this cycle of for a very strong government. on the other hand -- some people in the cycle are for a very strong government. on the other hand, i do not think it is creating jobs or employment. i think businesses are responsible for the creation of new jobs.

are you going for the economic problems? are you going to leave some leeway to member states to deal with these issues? second thing, can you promise us a cut in european legislation that is slowing down the growth, and do you agree that we should have less regulation? that that is the best solution for our current economic situation? thank you. >> thank you. >> first of all, we respect the member states. that is why in the strategy, we are making the point very clear. that is why we have addressed this issue of diversity, with instruments like the commission policies. the situations are not the same. we need stronger economic governments because it makes no

sense -- if the member states alone do their policies -- to discuss the great challenges we a global labor -- we have globally. we have to design specific measures. that has been a very important point in my action, and we believe we should see where some legislation is needed and avoid it when it is not needed. >> thank you very much. the united left. >> mr. barroso, last week, you made a proposal for an economic strategy, and there are a number of very important objectives

within the overall framework. greece has said a program being imposed on it which i think is really asking the impossible, because here we are talking about a level of gdp of 3% and so on. at the same time, several members states are turning to the imf. in your 2020 proposal, are you going to re-wroork that proposa? what about tax dumping and so on? is that going to be tackled? are you going to adopt measures to put a stop to speculation against the euro banks, which

have just been bailed out with taxpayer money? >> thank you very much. >> we are reducing the government deficit this year with measures. at the same time, we are doing what is necessary to secure the financial security of the area as a whole. commissioners are working with member states, designing mechanisms, which agrees could use -- which greece could use. it would include stringent conventionalities. the commission is ready to impose a framework for coordinated assistance, which would require the support of euro area member states. this is what i can tell you about greece and the stability. regarding the proposals, we do not see there is any need to change it. we do we do not see any need to

change it. -- regarding the proposals, we do not see any need to change it. >> thank you. >> i am not entirely satisfied. the question is that taxpayers' money is being used to engage in speculation against the greek state. this money comes in part from german banks. i am disappointed by the fact that so little is being done to prevent, to ban things. to put a stop to speculation so we really can concentrate on growth. >> regarding speculation, let's

be clear. the problems in greece were not caused by speculation. it was mainly caused by not respecting the european framework. namely, the excessive debt. of course, it may happen that speculator is acting against the sovereign debt of this country. -- that speculator is -- speculators act against a sovereign debt of this country. there is a problem -- program a solid derivative markets -- there is a program of solid derivative markets. beyond the systemic response, something is needed on credit