it is one of the biggest decisions in the prime minister would have to take. we have to get this right. we are safer having a nuclear deterrent. we simply do not know what the world will look like in 40 years' time. you cannot take risks with this. if you do not believe me, they believe the several generals who wrote this week in the newspaper precisely where advancing along. why take a decision now to commit that amount of money on the place of an old cold war nuclear system when that system still has several years to run windows menippe -- and those military people say that they're better and cheaper alternatives. president obama said last week that the greatest threat to us is not the cold war threat of all. it is terrorists getting ahold of dirty bombs.

trenton is not one to help with that. -- triton is not going to help with that. >> i have to deal with these decisions every day and have to say, get real. get real. you're saying that we have to give up our trenton submarines. get real about the danger that we face if we have north korea, iran, and other countries with nuclear weapons and we give up our own. >> what is dangerous is to commit to spend a whole lot of money that we may not have on the system that will not help when the world is facing a new threat. you want to hold a review when you want to exclude the one big issue which should be right at the heart of that. >> i agree with gordon. [laughter] you cannot put off this decision. you have to make it early.

you have to make your country safe and secure. you cannot rustle up a nuclear deterrent at the last minute. >> we are going to move on now to the next question which comes from the collect from holefield. >> what have you done in the last six months to use more environmentally-friendly transportation? >> i have been on trains all the time. i didn't think i have been on more than one plane during this election. our high speed rail will help people get off the roads and also to get off domestic air flights. i think that is incredibly important.

we thought living on a hill with a lot of wind and now much whether that's a wind turbine would be the answer. better is a solar panel. i would encourage people to use this form of energy because it allows us to keep our water in a way that is far more environmentally friendly. we have the first climate change back in the world. there's a lot more to be done, both individually and as a committee. we also have to get a world agreement. we have to -- and as a community. we also have to get a world agreement. >> when i told my party that we had to get real about the the environment, i did get the letter from someone who would agree with this. he said, if you're so concerned with carbon emissions, why not stop breeding. that is when i realized that i still had some persuading to do. in my alive, we have no proper

insulation. it can really cut your energy bill and mike -- and make life greener. the biggest change that i have been able to make is coming at very strongly against the third runway at heathrow. i think it is wrong to do that. i think we should have a high- speed rail instead. we should have a high-speed rail hub at heathrow. i think that would be a really big step forward. >> like many people, i try to change my behavior i travel a lot to my constituency. i almost always do that by train. but i do not do enough. i am acutely aware that i do not do enough. i wish i could and would do more. i think that part of the problem -- you referred to airplanes -- you're quite right.

they do create a growing proportion of the total co2 emissions. at the moment, you have a tax system that taxes passengers in airplanes. that means that their plans with freight in them are not taxed. you have lots of their plans that are half-empty or barely have any passengers at all. if you change that to 8 per plaintext, you would make a difference on an unnecessary aviation pollution. >> if we are obliged to make a real difference, we have to change the energy balance in our country. we have to remove this fixation about using oil. that is why our energy plan talks about how we can move with nuclear and renewals and oil and gas.

we want 15% renewables. we want to do more in every area. the question that i have to ask them is why are you so against nuclear power? that is the means by which we can balance out our energy supply without having to depend on oil. david, why do not have a renewables target? let's get real also about getting this energy village right. >> -- energy balance fred. >> of course we need energy balance. it is a great -- energy balance right. >> of course, we need energy balance. you could spend up to $6,500 on your home to better insulated and better protected. you can see your energy bills come down.

there are those who can carry out that work and pay for it and show you the reduction in the bills. billing green can save you money. it can get a briton working again. it can cut carbon emissions. >> the only problem is that we're doing that already. >> hold your horses. borden asked about nuclear power. -- borden -- gordon asked about nuclear power. i see energy bills increasing in this country. it takes a long time to build the nuclear plants. all experts believe that it would take well into the next decade to create nuclear energy. then it would be too late. we could develop a mass insulation program for our homes and hospitals. 20% of carbon emissions go

straight out of your window and through the roof of your house. if we only use energy more efficiently and invest some of the money that would be wasted on the nuclear projects, on wind energy and other renewable energies, i think that would be the way to a more sustainable future. >> you cannot have allison and do without using nuclear power. -- you cannot have balanced energy without using nuclear power. i spoke with a couple of gentlemen who are in the business of insulation. yes, we have to insulate our houses. yes, we have to have the electric car. we are investigating that. yes, we have to develop offshore wind power.

any party that is now excluding nuclear party is not really thinking about the needs of a future where we cannot be dependent on these high oil prices forever. >> actually, the situation is worse. we are potentially heading for power cuts in 2017. we do need to look at the level of gas storage we have in this country, which is much lower than france or germany. they have about 100 days. we have a little over two weeks. we have to make sure that we get to the renewables. we have had so many different strategies -- [unintelligible] >> something that has not been mentioned that all is acting globally.

i remember seeing gordon brown on the sidelines while america cut everybody else out. you have to create strength in numbers in europe so that we can lead in the world. this is a global problem that requires a global response. >> you're right. there is no british specialists solution. you have to face up to the fact that 100 countries have signed carbon reduction plans. we're trying to persuade china and america to do so. we need america to be on our side. your anti-americanism is not helpful. >> the lisbon treaty has about seven words on climate change. you do not need another treaty for politicians to get together

in different countries. you need political will. you need action. instead, what we keep getting is more institutions, more regulation, which is not required. it requires political will. >> you do not need a new treaty, but you need to work with people in europe and agree that climate change exists. i have a very simple attitude toward our relationship with america. it should not be a one-way street. we should not automatically do what our american friends tell

us to do. we have to make sure that we act on the world stage in our interests, not simply at the beck and call of anybody else. >> i persuaded the americans to be part of a g-20 that dealt with the banking crisis. i am still pushing the americans to take action on the climate change as well. but your anti-europeanism becomes more and more obvious as this debate goes on. i think you have to rethink your policies. >> they're just trying to frighten you. they do not want a britain that stand up for itself in europe. they keep going on about these alliances. one of our main allies is the party of the polish president to tragically died in that tragic accident. of the fact is that you can cooperate and work with your european partners without signing a treaty or giving away powers. >> let's move on. we have a question from michael in bristol. >> if you win the election, will you disassociate your party from the post protection that of catholic priest who have been tried and convicted of child abuse? will you have opposition to stem cell research, gay equality, and routine use of condoms when hiv is at an all-

time high? >> do you back the pope's visit to? >> i do think it is welcome that the pope is coming to britain if i were your prime minister, i would support that visit and do everything in my power to make it a success. there are millions of people in our country will welcome that and share the pope's catholic faith. i think we should try to make a success of it. but do i agree with everything that the pope says? i do not agree. i do not agree with him on homosexuality. i do not think that the catholic church has some serious work to come to terms with some

of the appalling things that have happened. i do think we have to respect people of faith. i think kate is important in our country. faith-based organizations do amazing things in our country, working in our prisons, providing for our schools, helping the most a vulnerable in our country. a visit from the pope, yes. but do we have to agree with everything he says, no. >> i am not a man of faith. my wife is. i have a little bit of experience with the feelings of anguish over the visit. i think they do want to see the catholic church expressed greater openness and repentance. you cannot keep the lid on sen. i do welcome the pope's visit. there has been terrible suffering there have been abusive relationships that have

left a terrible scars. we need a process of openness and healing. you cannot undo the tragedies of the past. but you can be open about them so that people can start to move on. >> i have met some of the people who have read late complained about the abuse they were subject to when they were young. no matter what you can try to do to help, there's always this problem that they have to face up to every day, that they were cruelly abused by people on whom they placed their faith and trust. they have to make sure that there is an open and clean confession about what has happened and that we help those people who have been put into difficulty because of this abuse. i welcome the pope's visit to britain.

i want him to come to britain. one reason is that the catholic church is a great part of our society and we should recognize it as such. i hope every british citizen wants to see this as a by the pope take place. secondly, we must break down the barriers of religion that we have in their world. they have common values and interests. they'll believe that we should be good neighbors to each other. i am from the presbyterian religion. but i supported the visit. i want religious faiths to work more closely together. >> michael is also concerned about the attitude of the catholic church about the gender matters. >> again, i would agree with you. obviously, we need proper protections and proper rules. we have debated them at great lengths in the house of commons. there are a lot of areas in which i do not agree, but that

does not mean that we should stop them visiting american tree or condemn them. we must build a tolerant -- from visiting our country or condemn them. we must build a tolerant society. >> i do not agree with the formal doctrine on homosexuality by the catholic church. i do not agree with it at all. i do not think there should be an uprising against the pope's visit. i think the reverse. i think we have all acknowledged that one does not need to subscribe to every letter of the theology of that church. >> i think we are proving ourselves to being a tolerant

nation. i am pleased that this has happened in britain in the last few years. on human embryology, i have disagreed with the catholic church. if you can treat a disease by using embryos that are enabling us to make sure that people can be free of some of the conditions that affect their lives, we should do so under the right rules. i am sorry that, in principle, there is a disagreement with the church on that. on the concept of contraception, we know that it is important to give women access and choice so that they can make their own decisions. i regret the fact that the catholic church does not do that. but the pope should come to

britain. we should have these debates. we should welcome all religions. bringing religious together is the key to having a peaceful world. >> we are going to move on now. that brings to an end of the international affairs part of this debate. you can see the debate next sunday. and join me live from an umbrella -- from edinburgh. let's move on to the next question. this one comes from mary from montpellier. >> given the scandals in the last year, it is hard to find a person in my neighborhood who believes in the power of their vote. >> how do you plan to restore our faith?

>> first of all, you need to be given the power to set any politician that you believe to be corrupt. you're the boss. we need to clean up all the murky business of party funding. again, there was a deal on the table. we supported it. yet again, the old party said no. gordon brown wanted to protect his old union paymasters. we all believe on the right track of cleanup politics. we actually have to act. one of the reasons that your friends and your neighbors are right is that we have this old

electoral system that allows the prime minister to be in peril the only two -- to be in power when only 22% of his party voted for him. >> if you do like an mp for being corrupt and parliament does not take action, yes, you should remove them. yes, we want to referendum on the future on the house of commons and the house of lords. you should have the votes. your vote matters because this is a big choice election. we have to secure the recovery. we have to make sure that we have decent public services. that is put at risk by conservative policies. we have to build the jobs of the future.

that is put at risk by both parties here. this is the most decisive election for years because it depends on how you vote in the next few weeks. >> the first thing the people want to know is that they are going to be voting for a clean up parliament. everywhere i go in this country, it is simmering and bubbling below the surface. people say, i pay my taxes to have decent politics. yet the money is spent on all of these appalling things. they want to be absolutely sure that this is never one to happen again. so we need a total transparency. that is the first thing that needs to be done. we also need to cut the cost of politics. everyone else in this country has had to make economies and make their businesses work better. i want to see many more people

involved in choosing a candidate for the parties. please let us not give up. >> one of the most heartening things over the last week, one of the great sort of the effects of these televised leaders' debates, is that more and more young people appear to be rushing to register to vote before it is too late. they have felt for so long a big turnoff by their own party politics. they are not excited. they're beginning to hope that

we can do something different this time. if you did not vote before ed did not register, register. it is your country. it is your future. assert your right to ship your own future. i think we can make this one of the most exciting election devore. >> i was ashamed by some of the behavior of some of the nt's and some of the [unintelligible] i think we have to be very clear that we want nobody standing at this election that is not transparent and open about what they are doing. anybody who reaches the guidelines that we have laid down, they should be thrown out of the house of commons and out of the house of lords. i was talking with young people only yesterday. if u.s. and the question -- if you asked the question, my job

may depend on the decisions of government, people may be interested. when you ask about crime and it depends on how many policemen are on the street, then it makes a difference. if you ask about schools and politics can make a difference. >> politics have been treating these people as much for too long. -- as mugs for too long. the truth is, if you really want to change things, if you want safer streets and better schools, the government has its role, but we'll have our responsibilities, too. we need to bring up their children properly. we have to work with the school. we have to help the police. we have to make sure that we have discipline in our schools. the best solution comes when we all say, "i have responsibilities as well." i think that is a much more honest answer on how we really get the change in our country. >> but i take responsibility

for my decisions and i ask people to take responsibility. but you cannot run health services on a do-it-yourself principle. >> let me get back to mary's question which is about people feeling switched off by politics. we have a culture of jobs for life. hundreds of mp's from the old party is basically know that, all they have to do every for

five years, is get enough votes to get elected and then ignore them the rest of the time. of course, a few get jobs for life, no questions asked, they start to cut corners. >> all parties have had to take action. we have to clean up the politics for every single party. anybody who commits an offense is out, suspended, out. they should not be in politics at all. public service is about serving the public. it is not about serving yourself. >> he says that he asks people to take responsibility. one of the problems in our country today is that, did you take responsibility, you are often punished rather than rewarded. if you work hard and save, you do not get the government behind you.

you get punished. in my constituency, i meet couples who say that they are trying to get everything together before they get married and have children. they tell the people who do not do the right thing get pushed up the ladder ahead of them. there's a sense of unfairness in our country today that goes to the heart of some of the policies. >> the biggest beneficiary from the manifesto is the 3000 richest people in the country you get two hundred thousand pounds each, and parents and -- each from an inheritance tax. you do not cut the chow trust fund. you do not cut to the school budget. >> pour mary asked about politics. she is being told about tax credits. we need to make sure that people are responsible where

they have made big mistakes. there is the fact that many mp's have fled their homes from one to the next using taxpayer money and have not been held to account. you cannot move on a less people have done something serious. it has made people incredibly angry. i think there are now starting to get angry by politicians saying that my party was better than the others. frankly, we haven't all had problems with this -- we have all had problems with this. do not anyone try to put themselves on a pedestal on this issue. let's sort it out and clean it up and recognize that we are all in this mess. >> no one should be standing at this election if they're not transparent and tell you everything they're doing with their finances. they should be working full time for the constituents' interests. they should not be in a position where they are not telling you where they will not report to you on everything they're doing and being held to account.

if they are not doing the right thing and are corrupt, you should be able to take them out. it is something that has happened recently that i am ashamed of on behalf of all politicians. if you're one to try to persuade people, then it is just not good enough to talk the talk and not walk the walk. you cannot say that you're going to clean that up. . .

so every pension will be linked to earnings and not just prices. secondly, women, and you are one of them come we are making it possible -- one of them, we are making it possible. that is what all of these things said been introduced. -- that is why. all of these have been introduced, because one thing that scandalizes our society above all else is that we cannot give safety and security to all pensioners, and that is what i want to see. >> 59 pounds is not enough, and we have to do better as a society, those who have done

well throughout their lives, we should be giving you dignity and security in your old age. i agree we need to raise the pension. the reason i feel i can give you that with total confidence that we really will deliver this is that we have made a tough decision to go with it, which is to say from 2016, we are going to ask government meant to retire one year later. that means we can fund this pledge, because there is an enormous budget deficit. there is no money left in the kitty. if we're going to make promises like that, and it is an important promise, we have to know we can pay for it. when we see people going into old age, if you ever worked hard and saved and put money aside -- it is not right that you should have to pay for a residential care as someone who did not pay and it's the whole thing for free. that is not right, and we are going to change that -- and gets the whole thing for free.

>> it should not have been broken in the first place. it needs to be restored. there are so many other costs which the elderly have to confront which make it extremely difficult to make ends meet, including food. the cold winter was a very good example. i heard from an elderly couple who said it is so hard to with their homes during cold, winter days, from they are getting in a bus to travel around just to stay warm -- cold winter days, they are getting on a bus. someone who is heating a great five-story manner is paying less than someone heating it 1- bedroom flat. we did a great five-story manor. >> every woman should have a

full state pension. this is another change we are making in the parliament. when we look at the pensioners, it is absolutely true to say the we need help, and that is what we are introducing over the next months, some people do not have to go into old people's homes. if they want to stay home, they can get the health visitors necessary so they can have comfort in their own homes, but i have some problems with the manifestoes of the other parties. david has not mentioned free prescriptions for the elderly or free eye tests. i would like them to explain to the pensioners what, in fact, they propose to do. >> i think it is disgraceful to

frighten people in an election campaign, as gordon brown has just done -- i would like to say clearly that we will keep the free television license and the pension credit and the winter fuel allowance and the passes, those letters you have been getting from labour -- they are pure and simple lies. they made me really very, very angry. you should not frighten people in an election campaign. it is not just right. >> pour.firstly, before i respond to gordon brown -- firstly, before i respond to gordon brown, giving pensioners 2.5 million pensioners -- that is how bad it is. i think we to make sure we use

what little money we have got and use it wisely, and what we are saying is this. the winter fuel payments, the age is going to rise. it will go from 6765 in the coming years. we are saying if you bring that forward, you can extend the payments to people who are terminally ill and disabled who do not have access to the winter fuel payment. i think that is fair. one final thing. i really cannot stress enough that i think this is one issue that is such a big issue we need to agree on a common approach. that is the only way.

i have not authorized any leaflets like that. why is it not in your manifesto that you're keeping free prescription charges and free eye tests prove tests? -- eye tests? this is an innovation that i do not want to see, when we're coming out of the recession, but you seem to be cutting it. >> we're doing that and bring forth a decision that gordon brown's government has made. they are huge. it is one of the biggest issues

we face. it is all about providing dig nity to people in old age, and i don't think that we will serve them well. >> i think it is about dignity, too sick to elderly people that if you have worked hard and saved par, you should be able to pass your wealth on to your children, and that is why we have this plan. if he put aside 8,000 pounds, you have a guarantee that that will be there for your children because you have done the right thing. that does not solvable problem. but it is a good start. there are people who did the right thing, were hard in their lives, who then get penalized. >> the first part of that is to make sure that people can stay in their own homes. that should available to all so

they can stay in their own homes without worrying about finance. the next thing we have to do is make sure that there is a limit on the costs they have to bear. otherwise, they will lose their home, and they will have to choose between the care that they get and their own home. if you are suffering from alzheimer's or something, and you have to be in a bit older person's home for longer, we will suspend things. >> i did we agree that there is something to look at. we need to provide more time for people. we have got a proposal.

that makes a huge difference in their lives. >> i think we need to help them go on doing what they're doing. one thing that will say is," i need a break." -- , "i need a break." it is incredibly complicated. >> we will move on to the next question, and this comes from frank. >> gentlemen, given the current financial difficulties facing the country and now the

possibility of a hung parliament according to the polls, can we form a government of the best talents from all the major parties? >> well, we should try to work together while we can. i always thought that is important politics. i helped tony blair get his education bill through parliament because i thought it was a good bill. call on the issue of triton's, we were talking about that tonight. if you want my frank and honest answer, i do not think a hung parliament would be good for britain is a big we need quite decisive government to take some of the difficult decisions for the long term. we have said some of the things we need to do to get the debt under control, and i fear if we

put them off, we could have a situation where we see interest rates rise and the confidence taken out of our economy. i that we need change. >> i think you are right. it is better politicians try to work together. there is still in dispute about that the black hole is.

so i do think there is a chance for politicians to work together. >> thank you. gordon brown. >> we have government ministers. we of the tripartite government for financial stability which brings together the bank of england and the head of financial services authority and the chancellor of the exchequer. we already have these things, but will we need to have is an agreed plan to get growth in the economy, and i am afraid the we do not have agreement and what needs to be done even this year. i want to see our economy grow this year. i want to see unemployment come down. i want to see businesses thrive, and that means we have to keep it in the economy.

the public must decide. >> this is about coalition. david cameron. >> i said it that we would do the best to make it work. i will do everything i can to try to take the country with us. there will be similar times before we get out of this. you do need to have agreement, and there is a fundamental disagreement between me and the other two parties about what we do this year. i think we need to make some

savings this year so we can stop the national insurance tax rise that is coming down the road. the worst thing you can do is put a tax on every single job in our country, and that is why there are business leaders who said, "do not do this." it is a threat to our recovery. i badly think we really, really need to stop this. >> back to frank's question, is in a bad thing or not? i do not think it is. gordon brown has talked about various bodies. david cameron says he will try to make things work, and he is making ludicrous claims it's the world and is. the world will not end.

this is to provide the good government, the sound government, that you deserve. do not allow everything constantly to be hijacked. >> well, i want the parties to work together. i invited people who are businessmen and women to work with us for national benefit, and i will continue to ask people to give their talents to public service, and that is something that is really important to do. i think korea got to resolve this. taking the economy through one the most difficult financial crises. we made the right decision to take ownership of the banks and the right decisions to get the world together. every time we have said we need to support the economy through

difficult times. now, what david said, even when it is fragile, he once for ideological reasons, i think, we did this puts policemen and thousands of jobs at risk -- this puts policemen and others at risk. nick adds a risk to our economy. >> this is trying to frighten people. after 13 years when korea the budget deficit the same size as greece, and do not take it from me. take it from the business leaders. -- after 13 years we have a budget deficit the same size as greece.

afghanistan is a top priority. you have got to bring people together better than we do now. >> if politicians are going to talk to each other, then i think we have to be upfront about what our policies are. i have been very up front. >> the priority at the moment is making sure korea and economic recovery, making sure that we do not have higher unemployment. unemployment is higher i want to

keep people in their jobs. bill -- the priority at the moment is making sure we have economic recovery, making sure that we do not have higher unemployment. and in point is higher. i want to keep people in their jobs. >> degree and the banking system -- the greed. we are the only party saying to split them up. >> there is quite a lot of bickering going one. -- on. when we announced to stop the

jobs attacks, they have now said that it is actually their aspiration. we want to stop this jobs tax to keep the economy going. >> david, you are taking millions at of the economy in an emergency budget -- budget. i would be very, very worried, indeed. it seems to be a return to the conservative way. when you got to do is have a global system. >> the governor of the bank of england has made a statement even about casinos. you're always have risks taken

with your everyday savings. that is what you have got to stop. it is what they did, by the way, in the 1930's and the depression in the united states. i think we owe it to the united states. >> we are going to another question. >> i have been in the u.k. for 13 years. i recognize that immigration is becoming a problem in the country. what are you going to do to make the system more fair? >> how are you going to make immigration more fair? >> first, we need to know who is going in and who is coming out.

but exit controls -- i would like to see those reinstalled immediately. i would also make sure that people that come to the area, where there is space for them to live -- we have got to do something about the problem created by the chaos which labour has created, and i would rather get them out of the hands of criminals. if it went to play by the world's, pay taxes, speaking as, that is an effective way. >> gordon brown. >> when we talked about it, nick did not say he was going to have

amnesty for illegal immigrants. at some point, we would legalize their presence. it would mean that more and more people would come into our country. now, our policy is to control and manage immigration. we have got a points system to do so. if you have got a skill, then we will get a british person to do that job at a job center if the skill is available in britain. we are gradually reducing the number of skills that we need to come from abroad. gradually, we will go through the skills list and make sure that those people who get jobs in britain are skilled in britain to do the jobs here. >> people that come here illegally, they should be able

to build a strong and integrated -- i do believe that immigration in recent years has simply been too high, and we need to bring that level down. people do want this address, and the other two parties are not actually really addressing this. we do need to read a cap on people coming from outside the european union for economic reasons. we say there should be controls. i think 13,000 people coming from pollin's. this is absolutely vital, and we are the only ones saying to bring it down radically. >> this is just an immigration system which has been absolutely

-- no one knows who is coming in, going out, no idea who has been here for many, many years. there is johnson, the conservative. what i'm saying, there are problems created by the chaos in the immigration system in the past. you can wash away, if either of you wish that there are people who had been living here for a long time in the shadows of our economy -- i want to go after the criminal gangs who are exploiting those people. you come out of the shadows, they taxes, do something of service, and then begin, but resources. this is also to make sure that we have a system that works. >> gordon brown. >> since i became foreign

minister, identification cards, everyone will have to have an identity card. it was got rid of. we are tightening up on that. there is a point system. if you do not have the points to come into this country -- and otherwise, if you do not have a skill that we need, do not come in. this sends a message to people that if you come to britain, there will be some kind of amnesty that will allow you to come here freely in the end without being thrown out of the country. >> the truth is, there is a big difference between the conservative party and the other two parties. dancing around it. the government had 13 years to control immigration, and yet, we have had the highest level of

immigration in the last 50 years. the idea of the amnesty, what that leads to is a big increase in asylum claims and immigration. i think this idea is somehow having regional immigration. you can work in bristol, but you cannot work in birmingham. they're going to put a border controls along the m-5. it will make a bad situation morris, and we need real change. >> this is a really sensitive issue. all i would say to them is, please, do not live in denial about what is going on. we have got lots of people here

who are working for criminal gangs rather than for britain. it is a problem. they are here. it is controversial. it is at least an attempt to deal with an issue. i do not think we can have another 10 years, another 15 years ignoring this, because you can not come up with processes like caps, which do not work. >> i am not really interested in that. i am interested in doing the right thing. when you have an and is becoming to this problem, then you have a real problem. -- when you have amnesty, then you have a real problem. people will be counted in and counted out.

>> because of the chaos in the past, we have lots of people who are here. if you just ignore it, they will carry on. you cannot deport 900,000 people. >> the only way you'll get real change providing good housing

and schools for people. it is like another replay. the fact is, every year, you need to talk to the health authorities, the housing authorities, the education authorities, and others, and have a cap to achieve a big reduction in overall levels. that can be done. what is required is the will. >> david cameron, let's understand. you are proposing a cap, but you do not know what the cap would be. counting people in an accounting people out, but you do not know how many people. none of us that perfect answers. c-span.org -- i am trying to

deal with a really, really difficult issue, which has been brushed under the carpet for too long. >> the point system is the key. you cannot come in unless you have a skill. we are counting people in and out. >> since labour came into power, sometimes it has been 200,000. that is 2 million over the course of the decade. that is just too high. >> that is what being part of

the european union is about. >> we are going to have to leave it there. " now, closing statements. they have 1.5 minutes for this, and lots were drawn. gordon brown. >> afghanistan and making sure that our troops can do the job in afghanistan and bring our forces home. and we talked to they also about

security and how we need to be part of multilateral disarmament so we do not give up our weapons unless others do, too. as the economy is going to do, in or out of europe. the issue for me as do not do anything -- we have had to take ownership of our banks. we put resources into the economy. unfortunate, they wanted to get resources out far too early. so i would say the seating that you two are at risk to the

country. nick, you would leave us weak. david, and you would leave us alone in europe. >> thank you, mr. brown. david cameron. bugs that sounded slightly desperate. it sandlike an effort to frighten people. -- that sounded slightly desperate. that sounded like an effort to frighten people. if you vote conservative, you can get fresh new people on the team, rather than being stuck with what we have now.

the family comes first to me. we need to do more for those who actually do the right thing. a clean break from the 13 years of failure. we can achieve things bat we need to make our country a better place to live in. >> thank you comment david cameron. nivk. -- nick. >> we talked about a number of things, climate change, the pope, things closer to home, pensions. i believe on all of those things, we can act differently.

but post or even making up your mind in the ballot box, you agree with me that something really exciting is beginning to happen. people are beginning to believe, beginning to hope that we can do something different this time. of course, there are people who will try to block a change. of course, there are people who are spreading fear to block the change you want. if we can stand up for the values that have made our country great, then we can be proud again, proud also of standing up for the things we believe in in the world. we simply do not need to change with the voices of the past. we do not need to repeat the mistakes of the past. do not let people tell me it's time that it cannot be different. it can. >> and that concludes this sky

news debate. full analysis continues now on sky news, and we will have something next week. after that, of course, it is up to you to cast your vote on may 6, so many things to you for watching. many thanks to our questioners, to our studio audience, and thanks to our three leaders, the first ever to agree to debate live on television. david cameron, gordon brown, and nick clegg, who will now shake hands with each other. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> the british national elections are thursday, may 6. c-span's spoke to someone from "the times" about the issues, the candidates, and the times. >> the amounts of money spent are much, much smaller than spent in the u.s., mainly because they cannot advertise on

radio. there is a legal ban on advertising. they spent quite a lot on direct mail, things like that, and particularly much more now these days on direct mail campaigns. email, too, but because they cannot buy television time, that has a profound effect on monday. we have limits on spending. it is a limit of about $30 million on spending by each of the main parties during the actual period running up to the campaign, including the campaign itself. that is peanuts compared to the status of any presidential campaign. >> the british election is may 6. now, a look at the three major political parties' broadcast. they disagree on the allegation of free air time. under the law, the bbc and others are required to air them

on their main channels. here is a look at the third labour party broadcast which aired on thursday. >> free nursery. >> free for kids. >> more support staff. >> people funding. >> rebuilding and refurbishing our schools. >> more people at universities than ever before. >> quality for all. >> for the over 75. >> freedom to travel.

>> the fox hunting ban. >> the u.k. is now smoke-free. >> of 44,000 doctors, 90,000 nurses, shorter waiting lists. >> the right to see cancer specialists in two weeks. but the economic recovery. >> the economic recovery. >> and writing minimum-wage. -- a rising minimum wage. labour will improve our schools and policing. cancer tests will come back within one week, and you get the

right to see a cancer specialist within two weeks of diagnosis if, in the future, we can build together. i do not see a broken britain. i see a caring britain, a briton with a future fare for all. >> this election is to save our country now and in the future, and right now, things are still fragile, which is why now is not time to switch teams and head off in a different direction. we are on the road to recovery, but we are not there yet, so think about your future. think about your job, your home, your family, and think about voting for a future fare for all. -- fair for all. >> these are the british election party broadcasts, usually 1 per day, excluding sunday.

the main national broadcasters are required to provide free television time. >> let me tell you what i think this election is all about. is about the future of our society and economy and our country. - it is about taht. -- it is about that. where is it written that we cannot deal with antisocial behavior and crime on our streets on friday and saturday night? where is it written that we cannot have the best state schools in the whole world? i know from travelling up and down our country just a angry people are about the expensive scandal and what happened in parliament, and it does not actually make it any better, but

as some politicians say, of course, my party is better than somebody else's. that is rubbish. everyone was doing it, and everyone should admit to that, and everyone should sword and clean out that. we believe that politicians have been taking the politicians as mugs are far too long. they have been saying over and over again just one more lot can be passed, when regulation issued, one more thing and then your problems will be solved. we know that is a big lie. the change we need in our country is recognizing we will only make things better when we all come together, when we all work together, when we all join together, when we are all in this together. that is the change in our country needs. it is the big society that we have been talking about in this general election. take cried. does anybody really believe

that one more law -- god knows we have had been -- had enough laws. this will happen when all take responsibility and bring our children of right. the problem is unemployment and welfare. we will say to people that if you can work and if you want to work, we will do everything we can to help you. we will give you the training. we will give me the support. we will give me the training to get you going and get you back at work, but we will say something else, that for far too long in this country, people who can work, people who are able to work, and people who choose not

to work, you cannot go on claiming welfare like you are now. imagine. you the people choose our candidate. you decide if your member of parliament has misbehaved. in terms of what they do and the money they spend. you make sure that you can keep on throwing a government out and then trade it for a system where they stop haggling and bickering. you make sure that the cut the cost of politics, and you make sure that the ultimate authority of where power lies lies with you the people began to cannot give it away at westminster that asking people first. people have lost control. the politicians have forgotten. the public are the master. we are the servant. that is a simple, straightforward, drillable

change you'll get for a conservative government. you can only be sure of change with the conservatives. any other vote, and you could wake up on may 7 and find gordon brown and the same team running the country. any other vote, and you can end up with a hung parliament and in decision and indecisiveness and all of the problems we have right now. let's concentrate on what we are going to bring to this great country. let's focus on how we would get our country moving. let's focus on how we build the big society, how we bring this country together. it is optimism, values, and that is what they will get from the conservatives each and every day.

>> you are watching the british election party broadcast. in the u.k., the law requires national broadcasters to allocate free airtime to parties. mrs. the broadcast aired by the liberal democrats this week. -- this is the broadcast. >> broken promises. there have been too many in the last years, too many in the last 30 years. in fact, our nation has been littered with a trail of broken promises. you remember them. a promise broken, better schools for everyone, a promise broken. i believe it is time to do

things differently. i believe it is time for promises to be kept. despite everything we have got going for us, like the still unfair to too many people, people like you who have made us the nation we are today, and you deserve fairness more than anything. putting fairness back into our society and our children is, in my view, the single biggest challenge that we face. but we can do it if we do it together, and here is how. under the liberal democrats, never pay any tax on the first 10,000 pounds they own. just imagine what that means? that means $7,000 back in the pockets for just about everyone. everyone knows that things are

tight. but we can pay for fairer taxes by closing the huge loopholes the only benefit the very wealthy and making sure that they pay for the damage that they caused. that is fairness. a fair start for all of our children. cutting them in a primary school to just 20. and doing more in our secondary schools is so no one is left behind. imagine, opportunity for every child. imagine, too, a fair and sustainable economy. let's make sure that they pay for the damage that they have caused, as well. high speed rail to build an economy beyond the city of london this is fairness. but, finally, there will be no

more budget donations for political parties, and we will fix the system so that your vote counts no matter where you live. that is the way to put fairness back into politics. this election is different from any other election. the trail of broken promises can come to an end, and a new road can begin, a road into the future, opportunity and fairness for everyone. we can say goodbye to broken promises and welcome back to hope. we can make britain the fair country we all wanted to be. choos real change that works for you. choos the liberal democrats.

-- choose the liberal democrats. >> you can see these again on our website at c-span.org. just look for a 2010 british election on the featured links section on the home page. >> monday, a discussion on s.c.c. policy with one of the newest members of the commission talking about the national broadband plan and what the comcast decision means for neutrality on the communicators on c-span2. >> and even now with national security adviser james jones. the former nato commander talks about the policy. this is about 40 minutes.

>> good evening. this is a symposium. so welcome. on behalf of the staff, the fellows, the board of directors, alumni, friends, i am just delighted to look around and see so many wonderful people from throughout the country and for all corners of the washington community here to join us tonight in celebrating the silver jubilee of the washington institute, so welcome. i would like to open tonight's festivities -- this is a festive moment, but i would like to open its night's festivities on a brief, somber note, which is, for us, to rise for a moment of

silence in honor for the women and men in the u.s. armed forces and the forces of a allies around the world who are engaged in daily battles on behalf of variations, our friends, and allies. so, please, join us. thank you. >> the middle east was going through radicalism 1.0. sunni extremists had taken a building and killed anwr sadat.

they held americans hostage and killed hundreds of marines in beirut. i came to washington after graduate school at harvard, and i took a job as a $17,000 per year researcher at a brand-new organization there were five of us back then, led by eight scholar. before long, we published our first research paper by another young scholar. since then, we have gone our various paths. i stayed at the institute, which have bit -- has become my home.

over that time, the middle east has changed from being a strategic theater to being the central focus of american foreign policy in its own right, and through that change, the institute has grown and matured to the point that today, it justifiably boasts what i believe it is the greatest collection of knowledge, expertise, and inside on the politics and policy in washington today. is with great pride that i stand here this evening with more than 130 members of the board of trustees who read given some generously to assure the health and vitality of this institution, with our past presidents who have led us now for 2.5 decades. with the more than 45 colleagues from the institute's staff who have worked tirelessly to

improve the quality of u.s. middle east policy, with val the members of our board of advisers, and with more than 200 members of the washington community, people who helped make, shape, and interpret policy, people who i have said more times than i care to remember, and all of you to join us in celebrating one quarter century of the washington institute. to all of you, i say, "thank you, thank you." [applause] just a word about our program. in a moment, i will call upon our into institute president, martin gross, who introduced our keynote speaker. i regret there will not be an opportunity following our guest

's remarks. instead, i will ask it to remain in your seat to allow our guest to depart and our board of trustees, with very special guests, to go to a bus to the department of state in honor of the institute. but everyone here will have a chance to pose those questions tomorrow afternoon. that is when this group reconvenes across the street at the renaissance m street hotel for the closing of this symposium featuring two outside gas an hour and in-house talent. wyngate two outside desks --

two outside guests and our in- house talent. [applause] >> thank you. good evening. i am martin gross, president of the washington institute. on behalf of the institute's board of directors and board of trustees, a welcome all of you to this gala reception to celebrate our 25th anniversary. this is a very important milestone in the life of this organization. at 25, we are no longer a startup. at 25, we are no longer the new kid on the block korean at 25, we have a mile-long paper trail that talks about the excellence of their research and the credibility of our scholarship. at 25, we have a record of ideas that stands the test of time, and at 25, we have a growing group of institute alumni, from young foreign service officers

in their first post its two seasons of veterans, like ambassador, who are doing their best to advance american interests around the world. in short, at 25, we have much to be proud of, and much to share in our achievements. i would like to take the opportunity to recognize my predecessors at the washington institute. they gave birth to the institution. they nurtured it. they guided it through their -- through its adolescence and led it to where it is today, a solid institution that is not a fixture in the washington community. please join me in thanking our founding president. [applause] the chairman of america