to change policy. if and when there is a change, through an act or for no determination, we [unintelligible] >> thank you very much. we are going to break right now. there is food, but i will be asking you to meet back in your spots in 50 minutes, exactly. thank you very much, all of you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] > this year's studentcam competition asked students to consider washington, d.c. through their lands.

today's video helped -- describes seeing the role of the federal government. >> on may 25, 2008, my life was changed forever. >> an excess of 200 miles per hour, this storm system virtually ripped the town in half. damaging a community of only 2000 >> the statistics don't do justice. >> is only a year ago.

even after a tornado, it does not cease to exist. the recovery began. today, the high school, city hall, and a majority of the other who buildings have and rebuilt. >> that was really inspiring to see the community really come together. they still struggle within the federal government. >> as hurricane katrina showed, underfunding and lack of leadership turned fema and to the most ridiculed agency of the government.

>> and the federal government affected my life and the community. it continued. >> i have heard people say things. >> they have gotten their act together and done a better job. gosh they handled it very well. >> they are invaluable, i guess, when it comes to recovery from disasters. it will be done by the football field. playgrounds, parking lots, a

number of areas. >> it was very apparent from the damage that it would be catastrophic. it would be beyond the needs of the community of parkersburg and the state. it was very early in the process. >> they also set up a community center here. not only for helping the disaster and the recovery, but helping the citizens. >> we distributed more than $2 million. >> it did not exist in its current state. >> however, due to a miscommunication, perhaps due to the policy, it finds itself today in a critical struggle. >> at the grassroots, there is a problem with the mother, having different people -- fema ,

having different people. >> is easy for misunderstandings because they don't keep enough people on the payroll to just handle the disaster in the heart of the country. >> they have a full-time staff of about 3000 folks. we have what we call the reservists, but the way that works, we rotate them in and out. >> it is very frustrating. >> we found out that a lot of that the information we received was inaccurate. some of the guidance was not policy driven. the decisions we have made a as a district on behalf of the students and the community was based entirely on that information we received. we find ourselves in kind of a

financial crisis of sorts. we are awaiting official word on funding. some received almost $700,000 worth. they are now requesting that that be returned. >> we give out kind of an estimate of the amount of funding. there is likely to be changes that happen from then the time that the money is obligated and even after word. and in some cases, more information is shared with us. that is when we have obligations occur. >> that is the difference to obligating money. >> they help contribute as much money for the project. months go by, years go by, and you come back after a third or fourth review and say that that is not how it should have been handled. >> they can take it away after

they gave it. we should have known that that could happen. we have some of the money to do whatever we want with that, but they have very strict guidelines. if you don't do everything right, they can bring it back at any point. >> the changing of the people has become such a factor for us. the people that we originally work with understood that we have to get back into the highest part of the year. the understanding was that the assistance was understood, and that is how things have changed now, being reviewed by the reviewers. they're not aware of the emergency situation. and the extra costs associated with it. >> the city may never have fully recovered.

and the restoration was not only the result of federal resistance. >> we went ahead and did it. >> we created the success. >> it also created challenges with the progress three have made. it jeopardize is my school and the education of our youth. without a renewed aid of federal government, by life and my community, which continues devastation after the storm. >> you can watch all of the winning videos and continue the conversation about today's documentary on our facebook input your pages. -- and rtwitt - -twt -- twitter

pages. >> lisa jackson talks about rising gas prices. then the pbs news our anchor looks at the future of public broadcasting and ron paul announcing this afternoon he will form a presidential exploratory committee. a possible run for the republican nomination. >> all this month, we have been featuring the top winners of the student camera documentary process. what the documentary and meet the winner during a washington journal. stream all of the wedding videos online. >> wednesday, the u.s. chamber of commerce and the national chamber foundation hosted an aviation summit on global partnerships over the next 10

years. it is an all-day event starting live at 9:00 p.m. eastern. the federal reserve chairman ben bernanke posts a conference on the economic outlook. potential interest-rate changes in the first of what is expected to be yearly briefings on the federal reserve's view of the current economic situation. we will have the comments here on c-span. >> remarks from facebook chief operating officer on the evolution of the social network and its impact of the 500 million worldwide users. she also discusses policies preserving -- concerning content. this is 50 minutes. >> is this on?

thank you for joining us. it is kind of the state of our industry these days. i was looking at the newspaper numbers since 1940. the u.s. has about 40 million [unintelligible] in a much shorter time, facebook has attracted so many

millions of people. >> it matters for us as citizens and people. facebook has grown very quickly. and we feel like this is better -- bigger than one company. the information of the social web. they are old enough to remember before the web. it became the place where we went to get information. most of what we did we do it honestly. if i go to the washington post on line and i read an article about what is going on in congress, i do, and they get the same article i get with others.

if i wanted the weather, i go get the weather. we start with a place of real identity. people can make real connections. it is much more similar to how we live our lives. really going around to which you

can say anything you want. this is a chance for you to use the power of technology to be who you are and connect with the real people of their lives. what i think we have seen over the years, has been fixed. the reason that there are more than half a million people using facebook, the transforms our relationships in many ways. it transforms but it means to be a friend. some of it is very challenging. one of the questions we get pretty often is, does french it mean anything if you can have 5000 of them? what is a community? the answer is really simple, that this is technology that gives us the power to connect people the way we were able to before technology.

my parents live in florida. 100 years ago, there is no chance i would not have lived within a mile of my parents. now i reveille far away. my facebook get to see my children growing up every single day. technology really takes the friendship and committee and transforms it back. it is transformative for institutions. i remember the obama election. people called him the facebook candidate. it was not a compliment at first. this will never work. but fast forward, it will be interesting to see what happens in the next election. it transforms her think industries. they are getting results around social functionality.

and particularly for the media industry. >> what about facebook in particular. ? it clearly is the preeminent voice. they put a lot of money who into a. what is it about facebook that makes it unique or different? >> if you compare us to some of the earlier players, a couple things make facebook different. some of the earlier players have a lot of profiles. they did not take of the same way. the second thing is that facebook is a great technology company. they did not push up the same technology. with a very focused on what we wanted to be. we continue to develop

technology and continued to change our technology said that we be at the cutting edge. it transforms itself from static profile to news ft. 10% of facebook users protested that change. it is a violation of privacy. if you look at what happens in the web, there are fields everywhere. the technology was really transformative. people understand [unintelligible] they had been willing to use technology and make the changes necessary to pay to stay ahead. >> you mentioned florida and here in california, even though

geographically you are a part, there are lots of publishers and latin america. talk a bit about what is happening in facebook outside of the u.s.. you people behave differently? 70% of your audience members, it is happening beyond our shores. >> the great story of and nationalization is how we internationalized. we actually put up translation consoles. the users translate the site, so it is very heavy. 300,000 people all over the world got together to translate it. spanish was done in two weeks. french was done in 24 hours. this was a community saying that they want this and they're willing to put the work into it.

70% of the users are international, and because of the way we build products, which translates very well internationally. almost every bit of content is created by you or your friend. it is not a product that needs to be specialized. we are specialized per person. every single person that has a profile as an entirely personal experience. it is the broadest ever seen. because of that, it works quite easily from country to country at language to language. >> in the last few months, facebook has received a lot of attention from the middle east. how does it feel sitting where you are being credited with helping the revolution and a bunch of, and -- countries. >> i don't think we have been

credited and i don't think we deserve to be credited. there are very brave men and lemon who risk their lives and are risking their lives to reclaim what they wanted for themselves, which is democracy. we are grateful, honored, or anything like that. some people use the technology to poke each other. is the same technology that starts revolutions. this is the technology that allows every single individual to have an individual voice. when you think about it, who have to be rich, powerful, or a great interest to have the ability to broadcast. you can't wake up one morning and have a platform historic plea to reach the world. if you were rich, powerful, a leader, you can get an interview with a leading newspaper.

we take the individuals and give them the power of voice. they were very upset about a large anti-terrorist group in the country. he got on facebook and did a protest. two months later, 12 million people in 200 cities marched against them. this is the largest anti- terrorist protest of the world has ever seen. last month, the new prime minister of egypt resigned. he did not hold a press conference, he resigned on his facebook page. it shows that he uses the same technology that oscar morales used. it is about giving of reasonable person.

it is about things like cooking and remembering his birthdays and posting pictures. >> the candidate back in 2008, getting ready for yet another alexian, it is thou pre common for them to announce their candidacy on youtube or on tour -- twitter. what are your thoughts on how the social media, how do you think it will play in the 2012 campaign? >> the 2008 campaign, we were about 60 million users. for the next election, we will be ahead of where we are now with over 500 million, over 150

million u.s. users. they were also killed the young girl. it started as a college only sites. we're basically spread the same way the internet population is with a few percentage points. our fastest-growing population is over 65. it is fair to say we will play a bigger role in the election. what excites us is that we think citizens can play a bigger role. what was great about the obama election was the number of people that voted that hadn't voted before. most of them go in with very good intentions. they want her in connection with citizens they represent. this gives them a way to do that. and as more and more people use facebook, they come back every day. this is something that as part of everyone's daily lives.

they find you can no longer broadcast. you can no longer talk at people. you have to talk with them and to them. they can talk with constituents. we hope that will make from more robust and engaging collection. >> everyone knows what is happening on campus april 20. president obama is stopping by. >> he is coming to do a facebook live. former president bush did what as well. he will talk in front of a global facebook community because it will be live streaming. he will be able to take questions from the audience.

that shows the ability of what we have here. the exciting thing is you don't afterbeat president obama to do this. you can be anyone. >> you don't want to take credit for revolutions because you're a business and you have a platform. most famous executives like enough fame as google executive that leads to the protest in egypt, [unintelligible] >> i think as a company, we're very mission based. mark founded facebook because he believed the world would be better if people were more connected. but in technology behind individuals was profound. it would have profound impact on personal relationships and

institutional relationships. to the extent that this is the fulfillment of that mission, it is terrific. he also takes great pride in the of the things that happen. a friend of mine posted it on facebook and it said that someone donated a kidney to a stranger on facebook. economists talk a lot about the invisible victim, the hundred and 8000 people waiting for organs. it is hard to motivate yourself to donate a kidney. they saw a post from someone who had a failing kidney and was five years away from getting one. he said, that person looks like me. i can save a life. and he did. i think it was because we gave that person who needed an organ

of real voice. that is just as exciting and just as important. >> the reason i brought google, people have a relationship with google. partly because there is a sense that even though they don't create any content, and they are in some the areas, especially competing. how'd you view the facebook in terms of its relationship? >> we think about this a lot because we want to make sure that we are a great partnership company. because we are a platform. we put out technology that other people can use and other people can build. if our mission is to be the technology people used to share wherever they are, we need a

great relationships with different websites and different companies. we're very focused on making all of our technology available. we pushed the technology sets back so you can use it where you are at. you can see what your friends have done. you can use facebook technology without ever coming to facebook. that is really important to us. everything is better when it is social and we want to give everyone and the power to be social. we think it is particularly important. i am a huge believer in the importance of what this industry does. are people going to discover the news that is right and keeps our local officials on tests. that is what she did herself one of the ways we get people there is that their friends tell them.

we pushed facebook technology out to websites. of all of the media companies, they have seen a 300% left in traffic from face low. we are delivering three times more traffic. the thing we believe, we can deliver more engaged readers. that makes sense. a friend of mine walks up and says, hey, read this, you can pay more attention. when readers come to media sites, they are more engaged and we get the data from different companies. they stay longer and they bring their friends with them. in a world where people are spending so much time on facebook, they are sharing. we will make it work for you guys.

>> there are 30 billion pieces of content -- >> we do not create content. i thought it was a big deal when michael phelps won his eighth gold medal. facebook had a long history of no editorial voice. i thought it is nice for michael phelps to thank us. over the weekend i talked to mark to put a sign on our side which says facebook congratulates michael phelps and the u.s. olympic team. i thought that was pretty basic. the company went crazy, but because mark and i had decided over the weekend without them. by the end of the week we

apologized. that was our toe in the water of content. we enable people to share content. that is important for this industry. >> you are actually pretty active reaching out. the head of the media partnerships is on a couple of panels later. tell us a little bit about why you are trying to be more proactive. >> two or three days ago we had 20,000 people who like our page, and the page is clear to journalists to see how others are using the page. e're having our first meet-up

at our campus on april 27. over 500 journalists have signed up to the, and we will host them all over the world. we think journalism being engaged with facebook is important. we have seen examples of reporters using facebook to do their reporting. getting on there and saying this situation is happening. anyone -- we have watched journalists' use facebook to share in real time. one of the posts i saw that got me was a posting from tahrir square in egypt saying i can feel this. the power of a post like that, going out to his followers. we can create or distribution

for the media industry. this is a community which is a small company. this is a community that is very focused. >> npr has done a good job, and they asked a lot of questions, looking for examples. a lot of folks in the newspaper industry are a little more conservative. when a company like -- can use facebook [unintelligible] are we being too nervous about using it more than we should be? >> i am a biased and server of this question. i think everybody should use facebook. teenagers could spend more time with us. we appreciate that. facebook is about technology and powering two-way dialogs.

the more you can bring people in, the better, and the example you referenced was the coca-cola company. they put their flavor for a fight among water last year on facebook. people selected the vitamins, the flavor, with the packaging looks like. they engaged with their consumers. we think when people bring people into the cycle, it is beneficial. one thing we believe his real identity is important. when people make comments which every person in this audience is so familiar with on their website, when the make comments about their identity, they are more often higher quality. people have their real picture, their real name. that type of engagement makes a difference. >> and get the best possible

reporting? >> i do not know enough to say that. if you are working on a ski, you should not post on facebook. as a reader of the news, one follows one story follows one story. >> facebook works with individual news organizations, and shares data. what is your thought of sharing more aggregate level data, telling us more about people behave on facebook at an aggregate level? is that something you would be willing to do? facebook seems to believe that data is individual, so they are not in the bill the -- business of sharing the that at an aggregate level. >> this goes to the question of

data and control. the first thing and most important is we never give personal affirmation to any institution, organization, or person. if you put your information on facebook, it is your information. you can post it and delete it. you can share it with the whole world or you can share it with two people. at the aggregate level data, we provide some of it. we publish things every now and then. we are not in the business of publishing aggregate data. we are focused on the experience for individual users, by institutions can connect with those users. about the news business, most people have generally embraced -- do some

aggregation. the model has been that we are the gatekeepers and there's so much information out there that people would come to us because we would be the filter. in your model, social media model, but the people decide what they want to read. if i am out jazeera and i stream all like video on facebook, how do i make money? that is the concern of the industry, if all the content goes for people are, what are the opportunities for us to make money? do they ever come backs to our sites, but will they come back and the site? >> we do not host most of this content. if it is a news player, you'd like to put your content on facebook, you can. you can put it on a public page. most of what happens on

facebook are links to your site. my friend libby posted an article, and it was a link. i read it on the "l.a. times" site. >> you're also talking to a group that is learning how to make money digitally. what are your thoughts on asking readers to pay for content online? >> there is -- the economics are changing, figuring that out to make it sustainable is of the utmost of portents. there are basically two models. users can take and advertisers can pay. i have never heard of third. over time that it has always been some combination.

some users will pay and some advertisers will pay. "the new york times" has experimented in one direction or another. the pressure that is put on the industry is to provide truly differentiated content. will users pay for the news magazine or newspaper that is continually providing the best coverage, stories first, best analysis, best editorial voice? i think they will. allyink the pressure to fin differentiate the product is there. another bright spot for the industry is users' time and attention has moved on-line faster than has the monmouth position. -- monitization.

the on-line world gets more than 13 but since i at that time. as advertising dollars moved on line, the state papers will be able to participate. trend should help. >> facebook is actually free. >> every time i say that somebody writes another headline. if somebody wants another headline, we are continuing to be free. it is important to people that it's this -- that it stays free. >> i asked a few people what questions that would like to writesd one of them about news. his question was a lot of newspapers are trying to sell digital press curve " --

prescriptions. -- descriptions. this facebook's fee help in selling those subscriptions? >> they could sell them on their pages right now. we did not offered a subscription product to help you do it. i think as we think about what we will provide we have a couple of principles. whenever we provide we will provide every one. if we were to build a way to make even the cost easier for the industry to sell subscriptions, we would put it out and let people use it. we have a technology to do that. warner brothers started selling movies. people can sell content now. that a principle we have is we do not disintermediate. it use our technology to connect

on facebook, we let you form a direct relationship with them. if we were ever to do anything, our model would be clear, that we are enabling you to provide that direct connection. we might take some of your money, but we will not take your customer data. it depends on the model. warner is using a facebook credit to sell -- we take a percentage. we take 30% for credit. they are establishing direct relations tips. >> not the issue of who owns the customer data. >> and the customer relationship. we would never get get to you. we would allow your customers to give you data. i could say, do you want to

connect with facebook? i would say yes. we tell you what information is going to "the washington post." >> the early days, the wisdom was this book does not care about privacy. then it went to facebook makes it hard for people to manage privacy. the last year there has been much conversation about privacy with this book. what are your thoughts about how facebook approaches privacy? >> privacy is of the utmost concern to us. they can post it, the league it, they can share it. facebook asks one of the things that make us stand out from others, and one of the things is privacy. facebook invented more granular

privacy controls. things were either open or closed. facebook came in with a totally different offering which was here as a site, you can post something publicly, something privately. i can either shared with my mom, my high school girlfriend, all of my colleagues, or the whole world. no other site offers the ability to control your privacy with every single thing you do it. that offers more control than we have seen before. that is because we cared so much grew sohat facebook ma quickly. we think about this a lot in that there is a tension between control and simplicity. we could make it super simple by making it all closed or opened.

that takes away control. we could give perfect control, but that could be complicated. every time we rolled out a product, we rolled out a privacy control. we have a lot of privacy controls and people were confused. we left the granite our privacy controls for those who want that. your teenage kids are among them. they know exactly how to use privacy controls because they want to post the right pictures to you, the ones of them in the library, and the ones the just to their friends. the under users are incredibly sophisticated. you have detailed privacy controls available, and we have some controls which provide control. as we think about privacy, we want it continued to err on the side of control. we want to give people the

ability to control the information if they have to learn things to do it because the users are getting more sophisticated. what all people could not do on our side, they're doing more frequently now. when want to make privacy as easy to understand as possible. right there you can see it, the better off you will be. >> one more question and then we will turn to the audience. there is conversation in washington about closing the government, about the idea of cookies and do not follow and putting restrictions on the liberty of advertise to track users. at one level it seems like it is a good thing for us to taylor advertising to a user plus interest and behavior. there are more opportunities if you do that. what are your thoughts on

cookies and should government offering restrictions on that? >> facebook advertising model is simple, and we think that is the standard for privacy on the internet. we host and server altmire own ads. we never give out any inner -- any information to any advertising. most of the do not track proposals would not affect our business at all. we think it is important that users know how other information is being used. there is concerned with practices on the web where users are not sure what is happening. i think that is something that is of a concern. it is part of why we run the ad some of the way we do. we know we are treating each

user's data carefully. >> why don't i opened it up to questions. tell us who you are and i remind that the questions are for members only. >> [unintelligible] given more steady concern about convert -- privacy, would you comment citizen agley on the legislation that would place the controls on the kind of information that is trapped on the web, and he has said that individuals would never tolerate a privacy inspector following them around. i understand you do not provide people cost private information, individual information's marketers. you also make available to marketers the opportunity to

market to people who engage in certain kinds of behavior or connections, who have interests, things of that sort. all that information is maintained in house at facebook. what is your thought on that legislation that is being prepared by john kerry and john mccain? >> we are working with the staff of the senators on the legislation, and i have not seen the latest draft. i can say we think it is important that uses a understand what is happening with their information. it is important that there is trent spray rinse the in what is happening, and we are glad to work with them on figuring out the right to do that and make sure we are balancing that with the ability to continue to innovate. >> forbid any information whatsoever to be used by

marketers at all on their face the page? basically, a block on any opportunity to use their behavior on facebook for marketing purposes? >> their question combines a couple of different ones. there is called the haverhill targeting, which means you are figuring out who they are. we do not do that. we cannot track people around the web to figure out what they are doing. we enable marketers to target certain demographics, not the same thing as a he year-old targeting. what is important is the public debate. this is for people to understand how to be marketed to, how the information is being used. we want that for users, and everyone wants that for users. >> i think you may want to go to

the mike, because they are taking it. if anybody else wants that a question after that, if you to not mind getting to and mike -- yes. >> i am from the associated p ress. up are for restrictions on speech or the media in different countries, do you find there is either a regional or national difference in the way different people use facebook? a lot of us are from latin america media and are looking for ways to use facebook for our own purposes. the latin americans or spanish speakers used it differently from french or english or other -- >> a great question, and the answer, each individual uses it differently, but there is no difference as we can see between countries. that basically people post

pictures. the content of those pictures may be completely culturally different attacks into account what is out culturally appropriate the post are not. they are linking to very different sites depending on what country they are and. the picture posting as the same behaviors. and we see these all over the world. >> are there conditions -- malaysia, people are much faster than in ecuador? have you seen any patterns? >> what tends to happen, we think of our penetration as the penetration of the internet- connected population. we do not see differences in that. what we seek is facebook is able to grow more and more rapidly in different parts of the world. >> i was with a mechanical

engineering background, and we understood different things, that you may -- he said that facebook is a company about technology, and i said i understood that facebook is a company about human beings. which of the two, please? >> it is such a great question. you have been misquoted. >> i knew you were trying to say that. >> we are a company about technology that and powers human beings. what is interesting about that is we think that all industries are going to be redesigned that way, around what we call social design. an example -- for anyone here who is posted a phone book about

you can compare our products in the photo product on the web. our photo product does not do a whole lot. you cannot do that much. it does exactly one thing, is you can provide your friends in an environment where you are. it is by far the most social experience. our photo product is by far the number 1 in the world. that is because the power of the social technology, the combination of the two things he asked about, is that powerful. when you look at the media, it is in port for that, too. "the huffington post" has used facebook deeply and has seen tremendous growth. you have seen other industries, 200 million people who

play games on the spot. that is because it is social. we are technology and we are social, and when you combine those things and design for a social industry, it is incredibly powerful. one thing i would be thinking about if i were in this audience what is a social news experience? how do i engage my readers all the way through the end of every other industry we have seen, the more social the experience, the faster it grows. these things are social. the question is, if you are going to the technology and social, social by design, what does that look like for each industry and for yours? we are answering that question at 4:00 p.m. >> i want to talk about what scares you about the future of facebook, and i would oppose two

possibilities. when he said the fastest growing audience is over 65, my children did not like that at all. that seemed like it was going in a different direction that they did not want. of course, that is one. is there an audience that says facebook as of yesterday, i want something else. the other is the issue of social engineering. do you ever worry that the tool facebook could be used by a socially savvy despot's or someone who could use the technology as a way to influence the masses in something that would not be as good for humanity as you have described? >> to your first question, a couple of years ago, the result lot of headlines, my mom is on facebook. i'm getting off. at first it was like, i wonder

if people think that. what people realized is a matter who is on facebook you can only connect to them if you want. now that question is, my kids will not friend need. what can i do? not my problem. can help you. we have not seen the youth leave because they understand they can connect to whoever they want. to your second question, anything that can be used powerfully can be used for good and evil. hillary clinton said in a speech she gave a while ago, where she said this is powerful technology, it can be used for good and bad. we take security very seriously. we have had situations where we thought people's passports would be compromised, and we changed a quickly soak it could be used for evil you have to connect to this -- the users would have to

make those connections themselves trekke. >> let me follow up. i'm sure -- it keeps you up from a competitive point of view? >> we think about this a lot. we are growing quickly and expectations are high. we are confident that a lot of companies are in this position and of the things happen. the fundamental risks -- and companies list their risks, and never seem to mention themselves. most companies less end up on their country the biggest risk to us is us, we will miss a trend, hired to many people, higher to few people. we have to be humble enough and it is true to the most nervous about ourselves. i think the other people for us is, how this technology evolves?

whether the state needs -- the standards, what is the openness? anding editorage from chicago. you mentioned earlier about just now about good and evil. also mentioned you collaborate with a congressman to establish new rules for privacy. what roles does facebook have to ensure that it is not being used for evil, and at what point does a user or activity reach those roles and become eligible to be turned over to the authorities? >> the rules are simple. the day that belongs to the user and cannot be given to anyone. there are times in different

countries went in accordance with all we are required to hand over information, and we do. we do not -- we do it in a very limited, very legal terms, and there have been times when and that is probably a good thing, but it is really fairly limited. what is important for us as a technology is you being able to put your information on, being able to share with whom you want to share, and to make sure that your account has not been compromised. you will notice if you come to facebook from a computer that you do not normally come to, it will send an email to your email account to make sure. we are continually working hard at staying ahead of any of the latest compromises, and we have a very, very good track record of protecting users. it is something we really care about. >> has that happened here?

have you had to reach out, give information to the federal government as part of an investigation? >> we have cooperated with some investigations and given over some information in accordance of the law, which is true for every company that operates in the country. >> thank you. >> i will ask one more. [laughter] the average facebook person has 130. how do you use it? >> i use it in different ways, and probably the most important way is that i have seven of my closest girlfriends from growing up, and we live in different parts of the country, and we have a group, and i posted this morning, "i had a hard day yesterday." the reason i do it is because of my six girlfriends, and i am sure that they will have comments back. i am able to share with them in

a way that i was not able to before. i also follow news, like the article i told you about, and i use it to stay in touch with my friends, see what is going on in the world around me. >> "the wall street journal"? >> my husband and i are the original readers of the newspaper print. if it's really well on the treadmill. it does, right? really well. >> thank you. -- it fits. >> thank you very much. [applause] >> all right, thank you very much. or we reconvene at 2:20. thanks, everybody. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> the prime-time schedule ahead on c-span looks like this. the epa administrator lee said jackson talks about rising gas prices and the impact on the economy. and then the future public broadcasting. after that, a texas congressman ron paul announcing he will form a presidential exploratory committee, the first step in a possible run for the 2012 republican nomination. >> if they send me the bill in its present form, i will sign it. ok. any questions? [applause]

>> are you still hear a, helen? >> they make fun of themselves at their own expense. president obama will head their again. watch live, or go back and watched a previous dinner on the c-span library, every program since 1987. watch what you want, when you want. >> news today that president obama is likely to name a seasoned diplomat as the next ambassador to did -- to afghanistan. it is part of a far reaching turnover of the nation's leadership of the afghanistan war, as the president prepares to bring forces home from afghanistan. the ap says it will reunite david crocker with general petraeus in a rerun of the military dream team credited with rescuing the flagging mission in iran. if crocker served before.

he was ambassador to iraq, kuwait, lebanon, syria, and pakistan. >> this year's student can competition class students from across the country -- asked students. the will of the federal government. >> my name is matthew, and i am a high school junior. on may 25, 2008, my life was changed forever. >> a history making twister in excess of 200 miles per hour. the severe storm system virtually a trip to the town of parkersburg in half. the story -- it destroyed 22 businesses, leveled 222 homes, and damaged many others.

in a community of folate 2000. -- in a community of only 2000. >> we were finally able to move in in late 2005. but in a matter of seconds, it was gone. but even after an ef-5 tornado, parkersburg did not cease to exist. today, the high school, city hall, and a majority of other buildings destroyed in the storm have been rebuilt. >> it was amazing to see the resiliency, the determination. that was really inspiring to see the community really come together. >> there is still a cloud hanging over my community. parkersburg's still struggles with the federal government, fema, and others.

>> we are still working with fema. >> in the 1990's, fema was a model government agency, but as hurricane katrina show, cronyism, underfunded, and lack of leadership turned a steaming into the most ridiculed agency in the government. -- turned fema into the most ridiculed agency and the government. >> disaster relief and parkersburg. >> i have had people say it is a love-hate relationship. >> there have been sometimes with some natural disasters that fema has not functioned so well. i think in the last five years, they have kind of gotten their act together and have done a better job. >> in several areas, safina handled the parkersburg tornado very well. >> as needed and requested.

>> they are invaluable in terms of recovery from disasters. and number of areas. >> siemens stepped in very, very early in the process. -- fema stepped in. >> they set up a command center, also hoping to the citizens. >> we distributed $2 million within the first few weeks. >> without the fema funds, parkersburg would not exist or be where we are at today.

>> however, due to miscommunications, perhaps due to flaws in their policies, parkersburg finds itself today in a critical struggle. >> at the very grass roots, there is a whole problem with different people having a different view of what the government can and cannot do. >> it is easy for misunderstandings like that to happen, but they do not keep enough people on the payroll to just handle the. >> unfortunately, the way that this works, we do rotate men in and out. >> it is very, very frustrating. >> we found out 2.5 years later that a lot of the information we

received was inaccurate. some of the guidance we received was not policy driven. the decisions we made as a school board and a district, really on behalf of our students and communities, was based entirely on that information that we received, and we find ourselves 2.5 years later in kind of a financial crisis of sorts, with the official word on funding. $700,000 worth, fema is now requiring that that be returned. >> an estimate of an amount of funding. >> that is of those types of situations are, where they occur. >> i guess that is the 180 degree difference.

months go by. in this case coming years go by, and they come back after a third or fourth review. >> we should have known that that could happen. >> we do not expect to just of the federal government let us do what everyone did with it, and fema has very strict guidelines. if you do not do this, if you do not do that, they have the ability to be obligated at any point. >> the changing of the people has become such a factor to us. the people that we originally worked with understood that we need to be back within a year, so decisions were made to move that timeline along quickly, and their assistants was understood,

and that is how things change. the third or fourth read yours. -- the third fourth week. -- read. >> this was not just the result of federal assistance. >> we cannot sit around and wait for what the federal government says, and we just had a can-do attitude and went and did it. >> we the people in parkersburg created our success. >> it has also created challenges. without renewed aid with the federal government, my life and

my community may face continued devastation. >> go to studentcam.org to watch all of the videos, and continue the conversation about today's documentary on our twitter and facebook pages. >> next, nato commander charles bouchard takes questions. from earlier today, -- >> the joint force command. i know that you are very interested in the recent developments in our operations. therefore, i would like to hand

over immediately the floor to general bouchard to make these updates, since we only have 30 minutes. general, you have the floor. the last time i had to talk to you, after 30 days, and engaging in this mission, it is time to give you a small update, a brief update of the situation as i see it from my perspective. our mission is to help in libya. to do that, we have been given

three major areas. we are enforcing a no-fly zone in the area. there could be weapons from the gaddafi regime that could be used to harm the population. we want to protect the civilians in libya. that is what i am most focused on every day. i want to give you a little bit of my perspective on the situation in the area today. first of all, in the east, you will recall 30 days ago, two

areas were threatened. today, both of these areas are seeing the growth of peace but that is not in itself removed. we are still facing pro gaddafi forces. we remain focused on them, and we are ready to engage them when it will be required. there is another area where violence continues against the berber tribes and also for the members of the population. it continues. the situation is a bit more dynamic, but we continue to stay focused. we're gaining in stopping pro gaddafi forces from engaging them. finally, the area of misrata.

you will remember that the population was nearly on the edge of the city. today, they have made some of the can gains in the city. they continue to be receiving in direct and indiscriminate fire from the population, so the violence against the population continues throughout the entire area. it is important that we will get it from a bigger perspective and not a city by city issue. we remain focused on those command and control notes that are utilized to order military personnel to engage. we remain engaged on the lines of communications that are used to resupply those forces engaged

in bringing harm to the population. we're also working on stopping the ammunition trained, to stop the movement of these weapons poured to enable harm from coming back to the population, and finally, we remain directly engaged in engaging those forces that are directly or indirectly targeting them. this is a campaign. this is an area. not a day goes by where harm does not come into the civilian population. but not a day goes by that i do not see pro gaddafi forces using weapons against men, women, and children. the pro gaddafi forces are shielding themselves with men, women, and children. our mission is to bring an end

to that. our mission is to bring an environment where diplomacy can take place, dialog can take place, and to bring to libya a time where they can decide for themselves. we will go to questions. >> first, please identify yourself. thank you. reuters. >> reuters. we heard in this room a couple of weeks ago that the nato forces had destroyed about 30% of the work firepower. recently, we heard 30%. of the gaddafi firepower being destroyed. it does not seem like a lot of

progress for two weeks. the introduction of the drones in recent days, could those be seen as effective, where the helicopters? >> first of all, the issue of numbers has to be taken in perspective. this is not a numbers game. as my perspective as the operational commander, this mission is about the facts, and defects is to reduce the capability and the will of pro gaddafi forces to engage civilians, and we continue to

stay engaged in that. therefore, in response to your question that it is more than just numbers and statistics, but this is about a compilation that will bring the fact that we want. for example, over the last week, it was reported that members of pro gaddafi forces have aligned themselves with the anti-gaddafi forces. we are well aware of troops not reporting for duty. there are those troops who are taking a moral stand and are not taking actions that are immoral, illegal, and unethical, and i encourage others to continue, and our aim is to bring an end to the violence not by numbers but i'd bring an end to the virus through connecticut, nongenetic, and other aspects of this mission.

in regards to the u.s. armed predators added to the mission, of course, any and all assistance that we are providing. we have been provided resources by nato. we have been provided a clear mission by nato. the leaders in berlin have clear support for our mission. we are able to engage in closer quarters, and more will follow, as i welcome today the addition, as has been announced earlier, of the incoming who would join our operation, said to me it is not about the numbers but the sex, and the facts is to bring an end to the violence against the civilian population. i welcome all of the assistance that we require, but not all of the solution is kinetic. there is a solution that is connecticut, nongenetic,

diplomatic, and political. >> general bouchard, come -- , you talk about the forces directly and indirectly. how are they in directly threatening the civilian population of the re-approved second, i think on sunday evening, there was an attack in tripoli on the compound known to shelter the libyan regime leadership. this is visited by african heads of state, for example. can you explain how that attack helped to prevent problems for the libyan citizens? >> first of all, our effort continues to be across all the we have.

forces are direct and indirect. tanks, guns that are being used, but more importantly, there is the use of rocket launchers in utility -- artillery that are being indiscriminately fired. that is what i mean by direct and indirect fire, and our effort continues to bring an end to their use against the civilian population. with regards to the engagement we conducted in tripoli, i continue to stay focused not on an individual. this is not about individuals. this is not about regime change. this is about bringing an end to violence by stopping the lines of communication in the supply chain and by stopping in preventing those command and control nodes, locations where

orders are given to troops. that is our aim. >> as follow-up on this question. german television. was gaddafi in this room? do we have any information about that at the moment? will and whether nato is hunting after him? >> my mission is clear, to bring an end to the violence against the population. i would suggest to you, sir, he was not in the rome at the time of the bombing because we saw him on television the day after. but this is not about individuals. >> i will now hand this over for the next three questions please.

>> [speaking italian] >> perhaps, sir, you will allow us to fix this, and i will take your question later on. you spoke about your mission to defend the civilian people.

how many? >> nato does not have anybody on the ground, and the information i received this information i receive through various networks. i do not have the such numbers. we rely on the press and the media to tell us about the harm it.

>> what is your idea of what is happening there? >> the numbers would be significantly larger if nato was not there to help. i have seen quite a bit of improvement, but is not clear to us. >> general, from stars and stripes. this is not about regime change and emphatically, this is not about gaddafi, but in your mind, how will this end if it is not for regime change dca mission

accomplished point with him still in power? him being removed from power? >> as a member of the unified protector, our mission is to bring an end to violence. our mission is complete when they stop doing what is immoral, illegal, and our mission will end when those above made decide, but at the end of the day, this is more. this is about the military action, diplomatic action, political action, an

international community solution to this. >> next question, bloomberg. >> >> general, i was curious about the situation in tripoli. there was no reason to bomb the building. that could be viewed as an act of regime change. could you verify? but thank you. >> let me be clear. every target we have is a legal target.

this is a military compound in which there are various houses and residences and command and control nodes throughout. therefore, i can assure you that our intent continues to include command and control nodes. >> bloomberg. >> jim from bloomberg. continuing with this same issue, do you have damage assessments of what was hit and that attack? secondly, have you discussed this particular strike with others? and there was an update about an intelligence complex being hit.

and then there was an update to the update. >> your questions are can to asking a coach to show the playbook. a good coach will not, and neither will i.. i can assure you that we remain engaged. one last question, please. >> what are they capable of? and had to deal with the gaddafi forces using men, women, and

children as a shield? >> there are materials unavailable to you, and i highly recommend them. i will keep the rest to myself but this point. ladies and gentlemen, i appreciate giving you this 30- day update. it is important to state that this is a lot bringing an end to violence, achieving a dialogue for diplomacy, creating environments of the people of libya can determine the future of their country. thank you very much. >> ok. >> on a statement on libya to the british house of commons later today which earlier today, testimony about economic and

military pressure on the gaddafi regime. it was announced that a temporary international fund is in the works the statement is followed by questions. this is about 90 minutes. >> mr. speaker, with permission, i will update the house on recent conditions. britain has continued to take a leading role in international efforts to protect civilians in libya, and the case for action remains compelling. the gaddafi regime insists on attacking its own people, willfully killing its own civilian population.

in doha, there was clear unity, with the african union in attendance. the group had agreed that the abu dhabi regime had lost all legitimacy and i will attend another meeting in may. i joined colleagues and showing our determination to enforce the u.n. security kerins resolution 1973. there was an agreed common strategy. that was an important milestone in world affairs, the sign of a growing ability to work across regional divisions and a demonstration of the breath and

unity of the international coalition in support of the libyan people. on the economic front, further libyan entities have been sanctioned, and the regime is now subject to some of the most comprehensive economic sanctions ever agreed by the american by the group. there have been a number of strikes. there have been widespread problems. without these efforts, misrata would have fallen, with terrible consequences for its residents. the united states has contributed unmanned aerial vehicles.

they are discussing the situation in washington today. there is the indiscriminate shelling of residential areas, which shows the continued to target the civilian population. the icc prosecutor says there is evidence of a case against gaddafi for crimes against humanity. with ford to the prosecutor's report on may 4. it is clear that gaddafi has no intention of observing the conditions in the security resolution 1973 that i described to the house earlier this month. he has repeatedly ignored the cease-fire that he has announced. we are also clear that gaddafi should go, and it will be hard

to have a peaceful way forward until he does. we believe the interim council is a legitimate into low gear -- interlocateur. her majesty's ambassador in baghdad. last week, i announced expanding this with british military offices. their sole purpose is to support the efforts better to protect civilians by providing non- military structures and logistics. in traininginvolved opposition forces or in executing or providing operational military advice. this is fully in line with the u.n. resolution, and i will reiterate that we will remain wholly in accordance we have

supplied vital, non-lethal equipment to protect civilian lives. this consists of telecommunications equipment and body armor we are considering with international partners for the request. a mechanism to provide a transparent structure for international financial support for public sector pay. yesterday, kuwait announced support for the national transitional council. i assure the house will join me in paying tribute to be skilled and break professionalism of the armed forces. their actions and the nato operations have already saved lives, and their efforts are essential for the libyan people

who have suffered so much from this brutal regime it. the united kingdom is supporting the other needs of the libyan people and every way that we can. the humanitarian situation in the west of the country is getting worse every day. many lack access to basic necessities. there was a shortage of some crucial medical supplies. that is what the development secretary announced the u.k. with ka-ching emergency supplies and help with migrants. the u.k. has so far given over 30 million pounds to meet immediate humanitarian needs, providing emergency shelter and assistance for evacuate poor migrants.

british support has given water and hygiene kits. but the regime must guarantee unfettered humanitarian access, not just broken promises that put the lives of the volunteers and aid workers at risk. this continues to be in other middle eastern areas. this violent oppression should stop. president assad should respond to the needs of its people with immediate reform and not with brutal oppression. the emergency log should be lifted. we are working with international partners for them to stop the violence and respect

basic and universal human rights, the freedom of expression and assembly. syria is now at a fork in the road. its government can still choose to bring about the radical reform that can bring stability for the long term, and we urge it to do so, or it can choose ever more violent oppression, which can only bring short-term security for the authorities there. if it does so, we will work with our partners to undertake measures, including sanctions, that will have an impact on the regime. four british nationals, we change our trouble good-byes, that they should leave. in yemen, the u.k. welcomes the news this morning i understand that president saleh has

accepted the proposal. this is good news. both sides need to come together to come together for the peaceful, inclusive, and timely transition process that the gcc has brokered. we have longstanding support for yemen in these difficult times. although the immediate situation in bahrain remains to be calm, there are continued reports of human rights violations. " dialogue is important. in egypt, which i will visit shortly, we welcome the actions being taken by the authorities to move towards a broad-based civilian-led government and an open democratic society.

in tunisia, we are working with eu partners. there was a draft law approved for the constituency elections held for 24 july. this is a step further towards free and fair elections and an open democratic society. the european union has a crucial role to play in the southern mediterranean. the changes in the arab world are truly historic, and the responses should be bold and ambitious. the review of the neighbor policy is due to be published in a fortnight. we have been making the case that we have the opportunity to help the people of the southern mediterranean achieve their desires for a free and more prosperous society, and a new policy should see the e.u. using its magnetism to encourage and support reform in neighboring countries. a partnership of equals should

reward those who make the necessary reforms and withdraw benefits from those who do not. finally, it remains essential the progress is made in a search for a just and lasting solution to the israeli-palestinian conflict. this is what the majority of israelis and palestinians demand from their leaders. this is an opportunity to be seized, not an excuse for further provocation. mr. speaker, in a response to the dramatic events in north africa and the middle east, which will continue to stand for reform, not repression, for the addressing of grievances rather than brutal reprisal. this is a policy in accordance with our own belief, in line with lower a national interests, and in pursuit of the piece of the wider world. >> mr. alexander. >> thank you, mr. speaker, and i think the foreign secretary, for the statement this afternoon.

in particular, let me join him and -- in saying that we look to achieve a police will situation, and let me also associate myself with his remarks about the continued need for focus on the palestinian conflict and a need for the review of the " good neighbor policy. mr. speaker, let me begin with syria, where every member of this house will be appalled by the recent reports of violence and oppression. first, on the number of u.k. nationals, can a number be provided of those in syria at the moment? and can he assure the contingency plans are in place? the condemnation that the foreign secretary has given to the city and government this afternoon, but it was only a few weeks ago on january 27 that the foreign secretary traveled to damascus to meet with president assad.

will he now he recalls -- he did the calls -- heed the calls? in particular, can the foreign secretary outline what financial sanctions are being discussed to make clear the international community is clear condemnation? in a statement this morning, the foreign secretary stated that there needs to be accountability. of course, i concur with that statement. what discussions 7 entered into regarding the accusations of crimes against humanity and human rights call for an inquiry? finally, the turkish government and others for a unified condemnation of these actions.

there are allegations of torture and denied medical treatment. these are, of course, extremely concerned. can the foreign secretary update the house on what was put in place? can the foreign secretary also tell us what discussions he has had with the current prints, who as has been reported is in close proximity to having an agreement? clear and unequivocal in our urging of reform as a response to popular protests on those items. mr. speaker, i join the foreign secretary in commending are men and women in the armed forces and our allies in libya while the house has been in recess. during that time, providing

telecommunications, body armor, reflecting the new realities on the ground. while we understand that rationale, will foreign secretary know update the legal advisor provided to this house to cover each of these during the recess? mr. speaker, a partly uncoordinated effort. it has, i fear, only increased some things. but in truth, none of those specific measures is likely to strategically affect the situation in libya. it does not appear that tripoli is likely to fall to either side, nor benghazi. the prime minister's official spokesperson said this morning, in summarizing the report to the

cabinet, and i quote directly, we need to prepare for the long haul. there was something published only this weekend, the foreign secretary denies claims of stalemate in libya. mr. speaker, the situation on the ground lead and admiral mike it mcmullen -- can the foreign secretary share with house what is available to him that has not been shared with america's most senior military figure? ? mr. speaker, that brings me to the military objectives and the military mission. the prime minister told this house explicitly does not provide legal authority for actions to bring about the gaddafi removal from power by military means. in an article on april 14, it

was said, and a quote directly, so long as gaddafi is in power, coalition partners must maintain so that civilians remain protected and the pressure on the regime builds. with the house be correct in understanding the language of this "the times," article as that from the view of the british government, the u.n. security council resolution cannot be enforced without the departure of gaddafi, and given the explicit commitment to maintain these operations, so long as gaddafi remains in power, can he clarified whether a libya free of gaddafi is shared by all sides of this house or is now a military objective of the british government? can he further explain how they are forming this joint statement? aircraft have once again been engaged, and there has not been any significant alteration in the u.s. force posture.

with the u.n. -- would he agree about the nato troops trying to fight their way into tripoli? can the foreign secretary offer any clearer way for? by which he seeks to achieve the outcome by the government. it is vital that he does so, not only for the concerns at home or abroad. this is to convince the gaddafi henchmen that their attacks on civilians will not prevail. mr. speaker, we see as a broad coalition as possible for these efforts. there is the addition that we have heard about today. the precise numbers of union -- forces participating and what efforts are being made to expand

the number. does the foreign secretary believe that the group is proving agile enough to direct the mission? when he further agree that the comparison last week by the defense secretary of the present mission in libya with the afghanistan campaign, we're taking on about 11,000 combat troops in theater. this is an order of magnitude but also needlessly threaten support at home and abroad for this mission. and can he assure the house that no equipment will be redeployed from afghanistan to libya, given the continual national security threat in afghanistan? mr. speaker, the government is acting in libya four principal reasons, but that does not keep us from asking questions. in conclusion, in light of the announcement this morning, what further diplomatic measures are being pressed to strengthen the

isolation and increase the pressure on the abu dhabi regime. >> mr. speaker, i am grateful to the right honorable gentleman, particularly about what he said at the beginning of his questions. i am sure the whole house will join in those efforts. it seems success of, and, indeed, i think we are agreed across the house about the middle eastern peace process and the neighbor policy. on the specific questions on syria, there are about 700 british nationals that are registered with us now in syria. although, of course, some of them will be dual nationals with their families in syria. we do have contingency plans for their evacuation. we have advised, previous to the change of the trouble revisory on sunday, it is still possible

to leave. for example, over the land border, three lebanon, as well as through commercial flights that we are arranging every day out of damascus. he asked about conversations that i had at the end of january with president assad, and i think it is that what has happened " will come as a surprise to the government and the president. i asked him than what he thought syria would be different from what it already begun to happen in egypt and tunisia, and he said it was because of their clear ideology, continuing resistance to israel, the popular support for the government in syria, and clearly there are common aspirations in many of these countries for economic freedom, for greater political rights, and the position of a syrian authorities, the foreign relations, it was not as strong

as his government assessed. we, of course, have many differences on many foreign policy subjects that i went to discuss with him, and for a long time, the governments of the united kingdom have urged the government of syria in a direction of greater respect for human rights. if they had taken that advice, they would be in a stronger position i think today. he is right to ask about work with the turkish government. i regard the turkish government on this as being in a central position and working with other nations as to how we should proceed. i discussed this at length last night with a turkish minister. we were in very close touch, daily touch, with the turkish government. there was work of what may happen at the eu and the u.n.,

and it is in a preliminary stage, and it will be difficult for the u.n. security council, because not all of the permanent members will see this in the same light. while i do not want to raise expectations of the actions of the u.n. security council, that would be unrealistic, we are working closely with our european and american colleagues on the security council to see how we can proceed, and we are doing additional work on what action the european union can take. i cannot go into more detail on that at this stage. in bahrain, it is not adversely progressing. they have reiterated to was their determination to proceed with that dialogue, to reignite it, and recently to the foreign minister to ask for his commitment to that as well as to investigation of the human rights issues that i have

mentioned in this house. he has given those commitments, and so we do look to all sides in bahrain, as i said in my statement, to commit to that dialogue, but is the only way forward for a country in the situation of bahrain, but i do not have any reports of success in that dialogue to give to the house now. he asks about libya, and he asked about the various announcements we have made over the recess of nonlethal assistance to the transitional national council. it was my decision in every case to make public the information as soon as possible, about every form of assistance. it might have satisfied what he called ad hoc announcements if we had waited to put them altogether, but it would not have satisfied, in my view, the need for full transparency and give the information immediately as it became available. this is a fast-moving situation.

the way we help has to be agreed with other countries so we are not duplicating what they do, and it will change from week to week. how we are able to assist them, and we will keep the house informed as rapidly as possible, as we did over the recess, even if that means that announcements come out a different times and are followed one after the other. i think it is important to remember on the military situation that it remains very fluid. so it does not settle into a stalemate. honorable members will remember how much misrata has changed, and the fighting has gone back and forth on the border. there might be what is called the eastern front. but it has not yet settled into what one would call a long-term

stalemate. the military mission is defined by the united nations resolution, and what the prime minister said in march absolutely stands. that has not changed, although i think it is a common assessment by all nations involved, in nato and in the arab league, and some nations of the african union, that it is impossible to say a way of securing the full implementation of the u.n. security council resolutions while colonel gaddafi remained there. that gaddafi should go. the military mission remains the find and buy that. on the question of the participation of the 16 nations participating at the moment in the military effort, the contract -- contact group of

international organizations, it has been asked if that is unwieldy. that has not been my experience so far, provided it has been well shared, which it should be. and having such a wide spread of nations and international organizations, which might initially look unwieldly, it continues through international legitimacy and the broad based coalition that is present on this occasion and in these operations, the like of which bedazzles -- bedeviled our foreign

i absolutely agree with the right hon. gentleman that nato ground troops will not be going into tripoli to resolve this matter. it is clear that in u.n. resolution 1973 that there should be no invasion of tripoli. the way forward, and the strategy going forward is, indeed, to intensify the diplomatic and military pressure. the point i made in the cabinet this morning is that in that situation, time is not on the side of gaddafi. we're also -- we are often asked whether time is on our side. if we should be confident that in this situation, given this coalition, this range of sanctions, these intensifying

efforts that time is not on the side of gaddafi and members of his regime need to know that. the resolve of the international community to implement the u.n. resolutions and, indeed, our resolve separate from those resolutions that he should go has been strengthened by the experience of recent weeks. if we have already saved thousands of lives. we have a remarkable international coalition. but the prevention of a reconquest of libya by force by the regime, which could also the stabilise egypt and tunisia, -- could also destabilize egypt and tunisia, it could mean that we have to intensify our work in the way that i have described. if we will go on to success. >> i am very keen that there should be time for back benches to contribute.

the short answers are required. >> may i suggest to my right hon. friend that it may be over optimistic to assume that the civil war in the villa will cease when colonel gaddafi -- the civil war in libya will cease when colonel gaddafi leaves the scene. he knows that these groups have been estranged dating back to the punic wars. which is why ernest bevin in 1946 wanted to restore mussolini's single libya to those two historic entities. if mr. speaker will bear with me for a moment more, we cannot

impose by air power alone an immediate [unintelligible] upon the country, which will enable us to remove by sea those rebels on the coastal strip who found themselves on the wrong side of the dividing line. >> it is always a pleasure to listen to the hon. gentleman. when i have heard the hon. gentleman, i invariably feel informed and somewhat approved -- improved. >> as do i, mr. speaker. i take the hon. gentleman's point about the pinnock awards -- punic wars, but i do not think that is the solution in this particular case worn out in the 21st century.

all of the people that we have spoken to are very much committed to the integrity of libya as a whole. i think of my hon. friend and, of course, there is strong support for opposition forces in libya. the people of misrata do not want to be taken away to the east. they want to be safe in their own city with their own rights respected and their own lives preserved. there is no simple east/west division in libya. in this situation, in contrast to what has happened in previous centuries, or indeed, previous millennia. >> we are doing enough to keep this operation going, but not enough to bring into a successful completion.

there is still -- if stalemate is an acceptable, then the people cannot be protected while gaddafi is in place. surely we need enough effort now that we are engaged in this to bring it swiftly to a conclusion and to bring an end to the suffering that is taking place in libya. that needs to be more than is currently being defined. >> i understand the concern the right hon. gentleman is expressing. that is why the ministers went to the nato meeting in berlin to ask for an increased tempo and operations and increased support from other nations, some of which we have secured. we talked about italy earlier. but i think you are right it needs to be brought to a more rapid conclusion and that is calling for a different military

effort in its scale and nature. i would say to him that would not be in accordance not with the u.n. resolution 1973. the use of large-scale ground troops would not be in accordance with that. and it is vital that we keep that legal and moral and international authority that comes from working within the united nations resolution. i must resist his more rapid or overwhelming military solution. we have to continue on economic, diplomatic, and military channel stricken -- to intensify the pressure on gaddafi to stay within what is legal and internationally supported. >> does the foreign secretary accept that the government's twin fundamental and are -- of

protecting civilians, but defeating gaddafi cannot be achieved by air firepower alone, but requires military support to the insurgents? while i will welcome the instructors that have been sent to ben ghazi, will the foreign secretary not consider that there has been much more military support that can be given consistent with the u.n. resolution that required -- that fulfills all potential solutions that would be required? >> it is a military liaison team. these are not in structures -- instructors. these officers are not involved in farming or training the forces of the opposition side in libya. our position is that we will help with non-lethal equipment.

the british government has taken no decision to arm the rebels or give them lethal equipment. our view of the legality, that is what i have expressed before, which is that the arms embargo applies to the whole of libya and under certain circumstances it is legal under the u.n. resolution to supply a equipment to protect civilian life. others interpreted in a different way, but we interpreted in that way and the best way that we can help is to supply them nonlethal equipment i have mentioned. >> can i congratulate the foreign secretary? he assured us that there would be no ground forces.

he also said there would be no regime change and then promptly called for a regime change. what is the interest? is it to overthrow gadhafi -- gaddafi? could he please explain? >> i intended to go over my whole statement again, mr. speaker. and -- i am tempted to go over my holster and again, mr. speaker. if it goes right, it will be one of the greatest advances of human freedom in the world, certainly since the end of the cold war. if it goes wrong, and creates a moral authoritarian regime or creates a long period of

violence, that is a national threat to all of us. we have to do what we can to make sure it goes in the right direction, not the wrong direction. that is what we want for libya and other countries. we are able to help in each country in different ways. >> notwithstanding be circumspect response of my right hon. friend, the foreign secretary, isn't it clear that the united kingdom and france are disproportionately bearing the burden of this air campaign? why is it that our nato allies are not making a better contribution? and are you disappointed that they are failing to do so? >> it is true that britain and france are making the largest contributions to the campaign.

i must say, the contribution, including an offensive strike capability from countries like denmark and norway, considering their size as countries and the size of their armed forces is very much proportionate to the efforts that we are making. we should not think it is only the united kingdom and france. there are 16 nations involved in the military activity. nations involved as well. in response to our recent request, other countries have broad military assets into play, such as spain providing refueling capability and italy burning ground strike capability. -- bringing ground strike capability. you can see that the burden is spread more widely than the headlines sometimes might give the impression.

did we stay in berlin that we would like a greater contribution from other nations as well? yes, we did. >> he is quite right to refer to the legal and moral base that is in 1973. within that context, can you restrain those voices from going beyond that? for example, the targeting of gaddafi. i am trying to restrain my right hon. friend on the question of peril. on the question of targeting, we will not get on the specific question of targeting. who or what is a target depends on whether they be paid and whether they become a legitimate target. i am not going to expand on who

or what could be a target. >> isn't the case that nato forces are in no position to have any input over the outcome of a civil war, given the sense of revolution? >> nato air force, as constrained as they are, are operating entirely from the air. nevertheless, they have had a huge and so far decisive impact. if it had not been from -- for the nato forces, i think that misrata would have fallen. when the soldiers are making themselves look like civilians and fighting in close quarters,

but nevertheless there is a good deal of evidence that in recent days they have been pushed back. over misrata is something that such regimes have to worry about, and have worried about over the last 48 hours, however clever they think they are at concealing themselves. >> may i compliment the foreign secretary on his attitude during this difficult battle and i urge you to continue to resist the calls [unintelligible] difficult though he ois, i have no role to play in this situation.

i did proceed that -- perceive that -- [unintelligible] >> i am grateful to my right hon. john ahman. we did operate under great -- my right hon. gentleman. we did operate under great restraints. we are clear about the focus is. and we are careful to stick to these operations and with our other economic and diplomatic efforts. i think we do have to have the persistence and faith to continue with that strategy. >> the foreign secretary is

working with our international partners to persuade authorities to stop the violence that you rightly condemned. can you open -- complete the -- can you complete the confirmed that there is a request to intervene in syria? >> no, mr. speaker. international partners are very important, particularly with turkey. my hon. friend is quite right. in the case of libya, there was a clear call from the arab league and that was a transformative intervention in terms of the arab league giving us permission to give assistance. we should hesitate to draw direct comparisons about what we may do between libya and other countries in the region.

>> the reported use of cluster bombs by the gaddafi regime against civilians has been widely condemned. has the foreign secretary sought any assurances from his u.s. counterpart? these defeated uranium weapons have not been used and will not be used in this -- from his u.s. counterpart that these defeated during a weapons have not been used and will not be used in this context? >> i am certainly not aware of any use of depleted uranium weapons. i will be very surprised if any of the weapons are used. i think i can give her the assurance she seeks. >> nato intelligence believes that some 450 of gaddafi's army

are paid to the tune of millions of dollars. can he take this up with the mckeown government? >> -- with the libyan government? >> there are reports coming from other countries in north africa as well. we have taken the diplomatic level. we need more specific evidence in order to say squarely that these countries are in breach of the u.n. security council. but whenever we have that evidence we will act upon it. at the ministerial level as

well. what have we done with the payments for these things? one is the asset freeze. tens of billions of dollars have been frozen in this country and across the world. but also, sanctions deny great deal of income to the regime as well. that is why i have said there is no future for this regime. time is on the side of gaddafi and it will be very difficult for the regime to continue to amass forces to continue this effort. we will vigorously seek implementation of those measures, and with any nation that seems to have sanctioned employment of people from their own country.

>> this morning, the bbc was reporting that four european countries were working out a resolution for the security council. before the foreign secretary referred to that in his statement, is that because of whicwhat he previously alluded ? about how itrried tha will be perceived if he does not adopt a presidential statement? >> france, germany, portugal and the u.k. are working together at the united nations as to raise because -- to raise the situation in theory.

different countries will have their opinions on this. i did sound a note of caution earlier about the attitude of some of the members of the security council. the position of the arab league is for them. and of course it is up to them to decide whether to be consistent in their statements but certainly, we have had no call for a clear message that develops. > >> is there any clear

determination for gaddafi to go? because otherwise if we are not clear, it will continue to get murky. >> the resolutions have already been passed, 1970, and 1973. i do not believe at this juncture in the that such a resolution could be adopted in the security council. that is why i say we need to work with the resolutions that we have and apply an economic and military pressure consistent with those resolutions. >> can i commend mr. wilkins and for its at the gcc? it, ahe president signs new government could be ready within 20 days.

what matters that is the stability of yemen. >> yes, we are ready to that. and -- to do that. i must say, the friends of yemen protest has continued, but we have not been able to have meaningful meetings in recent weeks, given the situation. we are working closely with saudi arabia as the cochairs on yemen. we are seeking peace in yemen and we will be highly active in doing so. >> can i ask the foreign secretary about saudi arabia, where there will also be reports about the oppression and there has also been the constitution produced in bahrain.

how can they be encouraged to take a positive attitude for the dialogue which toward democracy that is so needed in bahrain? >> of the strong and successful efforts of saudi arabia to bring a successful mediation to yemen, it is important that we recognize that. she is right, saudi forces are in bahrain at the request of the government of bahrain. but i think saudi, like many others, are very anxious that there is a social massive dialogue. we have discussed the issue with the prince and the foreign minister in recent weeks. and we do ask all governments across the region to respect the right of peaceful protest and at

such freedom from oppression. >> we were sending arms to gaddafi and other western perils. some of us believe that what is is a cease-fire.t i know that gaddafi cannot be trusted, but if there is a chance to end the bloodshed, that opportunity should be taken. >> of course, we all want a cease-fire. resolution 1973 is a cease-fire, but it would have to be a genuine cease-fire in which the debt -- the regime is his forces -- in which the regime

forces -- to change the course of this conflict and go beyond the resolution, we would weaken the resolutions by our implementation. >> given that there are now 300 dead in syria and hundreds more in prison, is it not time to lead the way with the united nations resolution to try to stop what syria is doing? >> as i mentioned in earlier answers to questions, it is not a simple matter to pass a u.n. security council resolution. of course, that situation may

change. the important thing to mention today is that they are at a fork in the road. they have really come at the last point at which they're going to say, we are going to embrace the reform necessary in our country and we will be supporters nationally and internationally. if they are determined to go down this road, then our concerns are wider. >> i sympathize with the foreign secretary, at bottom of friday do not agree. and i know that i often say this. the attitude is increasingly -- casual.tickl

he says it is all right to provide military personnel because they are not being instructors. we should get in there and get rid of them or we should get out of there. >> i suppose i am grateful for it. the alternatives that he seems to be calling for, if we think about them, one is to weaken in what we are doing to say we do not really care what happens in libya. to allow colonel gaddafi to run amok in killing thousands of his own people, we reject the alternative. the other way is to say we are not going to abide by the u.n. resolution. we think that the public is too limited in any matter of international relations.

we will not be panicked into doing other things. and what we are doing is offering moral support and the mission behind what they are doing. and we're going to, maintain that mission. >> i have a great deal about -- to say about what the members from the north have said. the prime minister has written to me today saying that we do not rollout supplying equipment. there are legal and are to questions that need to be carefully considered. -- legal and practical questions that need to be carefully considered.

we want to ensure that the people out there in libya are protected. but in this they are given arms and the right kind of equipment. there will be hand-to-hand fighting and they will not have the ability to deliver. that is where the problem lies. the policy must be made clear. why doesn't he go back to the sanctions committee and find out? >> i hope the policy is very clear as i have said it out. it is different from going the whole way and of those resolutions to armando -- to army and the opposition. as the prime minister said in his letter to my hon. friend, we are giving a great deal of assistance. what the u.k. is doing in terms

of the deployment of the royal air force and the military action they have been taking over the last five weeks which is a greater help to the libyans that we can provide in any other way. >> for many, britain intervention has been looking like a shambles as we move from protection of civilians to regime change. we went from no boots on the ground to advisory boots on the ground. now it is turning into a long term engagement. has he considered mediation? >> mediation has run into a problem because of colonel gaddafi's and willingness to

part. that is the difficulty. it is primarily for the u.n. special envoy to try to search for a political settlement. we are in no way out of sight for that, but it will require a genuine cease-fire. a genuine cease-fire seems to also require the departure of colonel gaddafi. when the gentleman refers to a blood soaked result, what really would have been a blood soaked result would be to do nothing five weeks ago. thousands would have been killed and tens of thousands would have been driven toward the border. >> the vote on libya was definitely not for humanitarian aid, but since then it has

become clear from the rejection of the african-american union and britain's prepared statement, will the foreign secretary further debate on this issue over time? >> no, mr. speaker. i will make statements whenever possible to the house. i am in no way resistant to long debates. i do not think of the government's policy has changed in any material way the requires a fresh vote in the house of commons. >> the italians are using the strike aircraft.

we have described the severity of the u.n. sanctions. these are all undertaken by external bodies. can you tell us if there is a plan so the house can know how the national transitional pencil might be in a position to offer help to be the be in military opposition? >> the national council organize themselves over the last five weeks. they have a president in mr. jalil. they have an executive prime minister, mr. jabr real. they are speaking to allies not just in the east of libya where they are based, but in van ghazi in recent days. there are towns in the west that have also declared their adherence to the national council.

they are making a genuine effort to include people in their work. beyond their current operations. they believe there is a story. i do believe they believe in a transition. they're working to carry it out. >> i thought it was pretty clear that the western sahara has been used for recording camps -- recruiting can't predict what pressure can we put formally -- " what pressure can we put -- has been used for recruiting camps. what pressure can we put formally or informally to deal with this?

>> we will make that very clear and there will be consequences of it, but we have to have the clear evidence of it. but the foreign secretary may well have the agreement of the libyan contact group, but does he have the support of the public for what is happening? we had a debate only a matter of weeks ago in this house when there -- we would be -- we were assured that there would be no mission creep. there would be no targeting of colonel gaddafi. the regime change was not their objective and there would be no good on the ground. we now have quite a key change. how is the hon. gentleman going to assure the public that, in fact, there will not be any mission creep when the coalition decided that further support is needed on the ground? >> i thought i made that clear on all days, but including today

in the house, that there is not going to be any ground invasion in libya. we are not planning to send troops. i think more worried -- more people are worried about a mission creep, but there is a ground battle involving british troops in libya. that is not part of our plans. it is not consistent with the u.n. resolutions. i can reassure people about that. i hope the lady will join me in doing so. >> a contact in libya of mine -- contact of mine in libya has a great deal of morale for the opposition fighters, whether they be in the east or the west, depending on their military successes, but also based on what the military committee

does. one thing is for the u.s. government to recognize the interim government as legitimate. are we considering that? >> the wording that we used at doha and in my statement earl earlier is that we regard the transitional national council as a legitimate interlocutor for reparations of the libyan people. it is not formal recognition of them, and is not. because we recognize the states rather than governments within states. there are very good reasons to continue that policy. but it does mean that the diplomatic mission inborn the b fdot is at ben ghazi.

our work is -- mission in libya is in ben ghazi. our work is with the transitional council. it is identifiable in practical terms. >> our activities in libya have gone beyond protecting civilians. is he not concerned that we will be taking sides within regime change -- with the intention of making a regime change rather than protecting civilians? >> it will be evident, mr. speaker, that i do not agree with that. i think that we are operating within the u.n. resolution, and so do the vast majority of other nations. the whole of nato and so does the arab world, including the arab league. i stressed the legitimacy of our

actions internationally. the arab league has called for assistance. the we are in a different situation than other countries. we are operating in response to the call from the arab league, the authority of the u.n. security council and we will continue to operate within those constraints. of people large number are still trying to catch my eye. i always call on as many people as possible. >> at the end of february, i and a number of colleagues visited syria and it was clearly at a taping point. two things, one was that the

young people wanted economic reform, and there has been a battle inside the government. we now have a report that iran has been invited in to crush the reformers. what message can we send that is robust that aligning itself with iran is in the long term a losing game for syria? >> since i do not have any deadly judo moves, i will try to make this quick. aligning syria with iran is a great mistake and it would be a great mistake to intensify that in the current crisis. >> can i remind the foreign secretary that i voted in favor of this libyan venture. and i did so, as many colleagues did, because we believe it was imperative to stop the deaths of

innocent men, women, and children. i'm very concerned about some of the remarks he has said today. there was a report this morning from a respected journalist about 1000 deaths in libya in recent days. we are not doing enough to stop it. i do not want ground troops. i am not a warmonger. but what happened to the american intervention that seem to be effective in the early days? >> just because we cannot do everything does not mean we should not do something. this is an extremely messy and difficult situation. but i think he should be proud of the fact that although we voted with heavy hearts, the vote that we had in this house and the other parliament had to support military action has probably saved thousands of lives and save hundreds of thousands of people from

desperately difficult humanitarian situations. it is better to vote with a heavy heart then to have a faint heart about the situation. >> because the foreign secretary carefully draws a distinction is a of ament suppliey non-lethal nature, but in an era of explosive devices, how careful can we be that even equipment, such as telephone equipment, may not ultimately have a use that is deadly indeed? >> the very much want to use telecommunications. they are using it. it would not be productive of them to divert it into other things. and although other equipment we have given them his body armor, that is to save life. >> the prime minister has said

that the revolution has been the tipping point for the arms in bordeaux. and that is applied to the whole of libya. can the foreign secretary therefore tell us what corrective measures the nato forces are taking to stop any arms being supplied to the rebel forces from outside of libya at the moment? or is it the truth now that nato is, in fact, the military wing of the rebel forces in the civil war? >> the nature of the operations, including our own men involved, are dedicated to enforcing an arms embargo on the whole of libya. they are positioned to do that. you can be confident that they are doing that. >> given the nature of the libyan border, particularly around this trying go, can the foreign secretary tell us what

actions he sought for those countries surrounding the be had? -- surrounding libya? >> we have been particularly active with the government of tunisia and trying to stop any flows into the villa of materials or arms that would be used by the gaddafi -- into libya of materials or arms that would be used by the gaddafi regime. >> i met with a number of constituents who are very concerned about the situation in yemen. yesterday, service killed some and hundreds others were injured. what specific representations' is the british government making calling on the president to end the violence? >> we have made these

representations all the time and i went to yemen and saw the president there in the beginning of february to urge him on in coming to an agreement with the opposition parties, which he now seems to have done in the last 24 hours. we have been very heavily involved. our ambassador has been particularly involved on a daily basis and the british government has been heavily involved for weeks now. ordering the army attacks to exploit his own people is completely unacceptable. it will have repercussions for years to come. it may well be a war crime and it will undoubtedly lead to sanctions. >> on top of that it will not even bring longer-term security

to the regime itself. it is a thoroughly bad idea. >> we have sent in a small team of military advisers. to what coordination are they hearing to, to offer victory? >> that is a very perceptive question from the right hon. later. it is very important. there is a french team going and there will be another british team. they're working closely together. the effectiveness and the experience of the british team is helping to ensure that everyone their works together. >> does the foreign secretary agree that is important to communicate with those from

previous conflicts? this is not just a western intervention. can i ask the foreign secretary how many muslim countries are contributing to implementing resolution sanction 1973? >> this is a coalition that includes countries from the arab league. there are two of the arab nations that are involved in the enforcing the no strike zone and in one case, ground strikes as well. there are other nations that are providing logistical and humanitarian support. i have already mentioned the case of kuwait. turkey is heavily involved in the arms embargo.

>> the foreign secretary sound increasingly like dr. ken gross, but his statement is different than what the prime minister said last month. in particular, he said he did not want to get inside a civil war. our regret that the foreign secretary has already said that he will not organize a debate on a physical motion in the house. i hope that he will reconsider that because it is better to be done on a government motion that a park bench motion. >> my point is that i do not regard the gentleman policy as having changed. -- the general policy as having

changed. within nato, those measures may change from week to week, and that is what we said we would do with the debate, on the 21st of march. it has not changed much. >> given the gaddafi regime constrained confiding capability, would -- what have we done to help deter the gaddafi's forces? >> we are doing a lot of work on making sure the resolutions are rigorously enforced by other countries. we are looking at that at the moment. >> can i impress the foreign secretary on the contact group?

what is the need for humanitarian troops to go in and provide aid? >> the contact group has not discussed troops going in for humanitarian purposes. they did discuss in doha the need for a humanitarian leave -- relief, particularly in misrata. there have not been discussions about military provisions to assist that humanitarian effort. we would be guided by support, butilitary repor no such request has been made. >> be aware that the many town

-- one of the many challenges facing the rebels is the need for public services. can he say whether he will consider releasing the many hundreds of millions of libyans accounts held in this country to help with their funds? >> beirut -- those banknotes that are held are part of the asset freeze. they remain frozen. the government has not -- it is not surprising. the government has not so far seen a legal way of releasing those things from the asset freeze. >> to those on both sides of the

house that will call for a debate about the future of this action, does not this whole issue illustrates the importance of the international criminal court being able to take effective action against before their own people rise up against them? and what is the foreign secretary doing to make that more possible? >> of course, it would be helpful if they were able to do that. there are cases that we have all supported, such as the president of sudan, where we have supported an international criminal court come to indict him. and then we have the people of those countries not being able to turn over those despots into the itc. >> in the weeks leading up to the most recent, major

religious festivals, jerusalem suffered the first suicide bombing for nearly three years. and ordinary citizens experience an escalation of rocket attacks from the gaza strip. what will it take to get the terrace to seize their activities and return to the negotiating table? >> we express our outrage at those attacks. we have also called on israel to exercise restraint in responding to those attacks. there is an overriding need to put new life into the middle east peace process and for israeli and palestinian leaders to make the necessary compromises, compromise is that compromises that they have never yet been prepared to show.

>> right across libya there are many. we're all of these places where people are fighting for freedom? >> i believe that the nato command + the arab allies are aware of these situations. some of them are difficult to help for the reasons described, close sightings. i think this has been done in the towns in the east and west

and i suspect will continue. >> the government has received very clear legal adviser. in relation to libya, the for the last debate, will my right hon. friend [unintelligible] >> we provided the notes on the legal advice for the house to have a debate. very important decisions were to be taken by the house. in circumstances where history showed the house that it really did want to know more about the legal advice. we did that on that occasion. i will not commit the government to do is on a case by case or continuous basis.

>> should colonel gaddafi be deposed by whatever means? would he be subject to the 19703 human rights act -- sorry, not the human rights act. where he is subject to the worker as part of the 1970 u.n. resolution? >> that depends on what he has done. we are looking at colonel gaddafi at the moment. we are expecting a report from the icc next wednesday on the fourth of may. it is the international criminal court that will come to a few about it. >> with my right hon. friend agree with me that over the last few weeks not only have the eyes of much of the world been