particularly the u.s. ambassador to afghanistan has said that a series of recent attacks, including the deadly attack on the u.s. embassy compound in cobble, or the work -- and n kabul. they have linked it to the pakistan government. he added that this is something that must up. the message they need to know is we will do everything we can for our forces. i was glad to read that pakistan's leaders are going to

do just that, at more directly. i have repeatedly written to press to have the crew at it. to make or tools available to our government agencies. this is long overdue. when we visited afghanistan in august, we heard repeatedly how the safe havens and in pakistan war at in afghanistan. in discussions, we read the same excuses. they are unable for what ever reason to go after the hot

in afghanistan. when asked why pakistan has the public condemned the cross border tax by the afghan taliban, he was unable to provide an answer as to why there has been the public condemnation by pakistan's leaders of the terrorists who are doing this. it is unacceptable. our forces continue of pakistan's leaders are trying to go after them and have failed state contend their cross border attacks. because of that saving, pakistan there's some

irresponsibility. is in paris and that the break the ties. the balance of my statement relative to both afghanistan and iraq will be put in the record. i call upon senator mccain. >> thank you. let me thank our witnesses. i want to echo the chairmen in recognizing the final appearance before our committee. they do everything we asked them and more to keep us safe.

this is an important time for this committee to consider the war's. 10,000 u.s. forces will depart from afghanistan to comply with the president aggressive drug on schedule. i have deep reservations about both of these deadlines. the iraqis in safeguarding the country's stability. for this reason, many of us are concerned to see media reports

suggesting that they had dramatically reduce the number of troops and was considering the force in iraq as low as 3000 troops. officials have since insisted that this number is not final and that no altman's decision has been made. i hope this is true. everything i have heard leads me to believe that such a minimal presence which jeopardized the real gains that we have made in that country. as they testified to this committee and fannie larry, the iraqi security forces still have major gaps and their capabilities that will persist beyond 2011. this leads to a set emissions were the forces will require sustained military support from intelligence collection and

maintenance cooperation and a continued need for u.s. forces in disputed territories of north and iraq. if u.s. military support is not forthcoming in helping iraqi forces to fill this gap, the stability we put at grave risk. i would urge the president to listen to the vice of our commanders and maintain the presence of u.s. forces in iraq your they claim that the bush and initiation dated iraq. i would urge them to listen to our military commanders in afghanistan.

general petraeus testified before the senate test committee, no military commander recommended the plan that the president adopted. the job done in the troops by next summer. you stated that the plan would show more risk than you have been prepared to accept. the reason they recommended this plan is because it could take vital combat power out of the hands of our people on the ground and they need it most. after achieving so much after 10 hard years of fighting and with the prospects of success being within reach at the moment we should be limiting the risks to our mission, the plan would do the opposite.

and all of the way he outlined in his prepared testimony. it is inflicting enormous damage on al qaeda and their allies. we have taking critical to rain away from the is insurgency predict away from the insurgency. -- we have taken critical to rain away from the insurgency. these damaging signals were sent to our afghan friend to fear that our security gains are fleeting and that the taliban will return to power. it is occurring from a position of growing weakness. now is not the time to put our security gains in unnecessary

risk. this is true in light of the ongoing strategic challenges that we face in this campaign. the other challenges the problem of pakistan. insurgent groups like the haqqanis network in distinction from pakistan's intelligence service. they continue to use to attack and kill afghans. they must reevaluate the policy. we must recognize that abandoning pakistan is not the answer. we tried that once.

we cut off our systems to pakistan. the problem got worse, not better. i say this without recognizing with a better alternative approach this will be. i hope this provides clarity on how to proceed with this critical hot matter. -- with this critical matter. >> thank you. >> thank you. i would ask that my full salmon be put on the record. it is an honor for me to appear before you for the first time and to represent the men and women in our armed forces. on theiro thank you yo behalf for your support in a

time of war. we make sure that they will succeed in the mission. i testified as a nominee. i pledge the deviltry congress as a full partner -- that i would treat congress as a full partner. it is important to have your guidance and consul time as we deal with the challenges facing our department. did before returning to pressing issues of challenges of the wars in iraq and afghanistan, i would like to briefly address the challenge of the defense budget. it relates to everything we do. the department has been

undergoing a strategy driven process to prepare to implement the more than $450 billion in savings that will be required over the next 10-years as a result of the debt ceiling agreement. while this review is ongoing, and no decisions have been made, i am determined to make these decisions strategically of looking at the needs that are defense department has to face now and in the future. it is so we can maintain the most dominant military in world , a force that is agile, reddy, a capable, and adaptable. these will require a hard decision.

my goal is to try to make this successful. the guy month and will be putting in place as a move forward on these discussions, i want to maintain the best military and the world. i do not want to hollow out the force. every time we have gone to the reductions, danger has been that we hollowed out the force. i am not going to do that. it requires a balanced approach in order to achieve significant reductions that i am required to do. i'm going to look at all efforts -- all areas, reducing overhead. there are gratuities.

i am going to look at the conversation area. in some of the areas, it has increased by 80% in health care alone. i have to do it in way that does not jeopardize the volunteer force. i've got to maintain faith with those that have gone deployment after deployment with their lives on the line. we cannot undermine the commitment we have made to them. we have to look reforms in area. we have to maintain faith with those that are out there fighting every day. we are going to have to look at how we turn a corner. we have gone through a decade of

war in which the defense budget has more than doubled. now we have to look at a decade where we have to prevent war but be able to fight wars and win wars if we have to, of recognizing that we will have less resources. did that is the challenge that we face as we confront this budget issue. the department is taking on a share of the efforts to achieve fiscal discipline. we will. i want to caution strongly against further cuts to defense as we could do that, particularly with the mechanism that has been built into the sequestered once.

it is a blind formula appear. it guarantees we will haul out the force. i am confident that we can meet our national security response ability and do our part to help this country get its fiscal house in order. and at the same time maintain a strong national defense. we do not have to make a choice between fiscal security and national security. even as we grapple with the budget, almost immediate challenges are the war in iraq and afghanistan. the challenges that remain. we are achieving our should teach it objectives. let me briefly address both of these efforts. i will begin with iraq. our focus has been on ending the war in a responsible way that

allows iraq to become a secure, sovereign, a stable, self- reliant nation. and a positive force for stability in the region. we are planning to draw down our combat troops by the end of the year. as you know, last month the rocky political leadership indicated publicly that they're interested in an ongoing training relationship with the united states. as a result, they have been in the process of negotiating leaders as to what their needs are. we are seriously considering

this request. no final decisions have been made. we will consults with congress before such decisions are made as to what's a post a 2020 training presence will look like. and with other countries similar to the partnerships that we have with other countries in region. it to be a means of furthering our strategic partnership with iraq ... have declined a future role. that talentuestion is remain there.

they have to develop a resolution to the situation. they have to promote security efforts to field -- to deal with the extremist groups. they have to have security efforts to go with the remnants of al qaeda that still remain. they have to work at a political process to build a safer and stronger iraq. as he moved decisively since 2009 to end the war, we have turned our focus and resources to afghanistan. the effort to build a stable and secure country there is the provide a safe haven.

we have established conditions at the opening afghans to the path to assume the responsibility. we have made it then began progress with regard to our primary mission of distracting, dismantling and it defeating al qaeda in dealing with the operations of pay down osama. this progress of august to begin transitioning the afghan security control. we have done that in seven areas

of the country since july. we began implementing a gradual and irresponsible jot down that is essential to the success of that transition process. general allan who was briefed me this week again is in the process of laying out those plans that will provide irresponsible transition. -- that will provide a responsible transition. my assessment is that our efforts in afghanistan is happening in the right direction. we have to be clear eyed about the challenges that remain. as the tell them lost control of territory last year, there's a greater reliance on headlines.

there are high-profile attacks including the it tends to attack the united states and busy. we are concerned that these attacks represent a loss of life. they must be confronted and cannot be allowed to continue. we judge this change in tactics by shift in momentum in our favor. overall violence and afghanistan is winding down. it is down substantially in areas where we concentrate.

the musty more effective in stopping these attacks. it creates perceptions of decreasing security. we're working with the afghan counterparts to discuss how we can provide better protection. the cannot let this deter is some progress ama. the king give them the advantages they have lost elsewhere in the country. we cannot allow terrorists to have safe havens from the attacks that killed our forces. we cannot allow that to happen. we have to bring pressure for them to do their part to come from their issue.

we must not underestimate the difficult task. we had some tough days in this campaign. there ted is a lie ahead. every time i write a condolence it is taking this office. i have received the remains of those who were killed in the a helicopter crash last month. spending time with the family is of those who died or were seriously wounded in the service

of this country. they said if you really want to care about happen to my loved ones to carry this on. they've done right protecting the country. he has worked tirelessly and successfully. he has advocated effective operations. i know that of america joined me in thanking him for his decades of dedicated service. he has had extraordinary work on behalf of the country of our men

and women. this will forever be his legacy. i am deeply grateful for a service of trichet. >> thank you. thank you for the opportunity. this of the last time i there before you in uniform i hope. let me express my gratitude for the support you provide. we may not always agree on every issue. it is fair to say you do not always agree amongst yourselves.

none of you has failed to put the best interest of our troops and their families. the issues you debate, the boat you take, holds and the balance of america's sons and daughters. in afghanistan, i believe the situation is steadily improving. it can be separated from the strategy as a whole. it is meeting our objectives. at camp forces have arrested the

momentum in several key areas. the number of attacks have been the same or lower than it was at the same time last year. we are slightly ahead of our goals for the afghan national security forces. there's seven localities spinel. we are well posture to begin the withdrawal of the american troops by the end of this year. the taliban have adapted as we have advanced. we will produce a maximum psychological impact for a minimal investment in manpower. this calls into the category as the attacks against coble --

kabul and the assassination tuesday of former afghan president rabbani. they're playing on the fears of a traumatized people. we must some is unsure them. we must continue to work with the government to improve protection of key leaders. we will put pressure on the enemy and expand the capability. counterinsurgency is never enough. other critical challenges plan the -- plague us.

there is the pernicious efforts affect the poor governance and corruption. it makes a mockery of the rule of law. these are be transitioning authority. it sends an aggrieved populace into the arms of the taliban. if such systemic corruption is left unchecked, we risk leaving behind a government in which we cannot reasonably suspect afghans to have faith. at best, this would lead to localize conflicts inside the country. at worst, it could lead to government collapsed and civil war. a second but no less worst challenge is the impunity which -- with which certain extremist groups are allowed to operate on pakistani soil.

the network acts as a veritable army of pakistan's internal services intelligence agency. with isi support, the operatives planned that truck attack as well as the assault on our agency. we also have incredible intelligence that they were behind the attack in kabul and a host of other smaller operations. choosing to use violent extremism as an instrument of policy, the government of pakistan and most especially the pakistan the army and isi, jeopardizes not only the strategic partnership, but pakistan's opportunity to be a respected nation with legitimate regional influence. they may believe that by using these proxy's, they are hedging their bets or regressing what they -- or addressing an imbalance in regional power.

in reality, they have already lost that bet. they have eroded internal security and their position in the region. they have undermined their international credibility and threaten their economic well- being. only a decision to break with this policy and pave the road to a positive future for pakistan. as you know, i have expended enormous energy on this relationship. i have met with their general more than two dozen times, including two-hour weekend -- meeting last weekend in spain. i believe we share a common interest against terrorism and i recognize a great political and economic difficulties pakistan faces. i have done this because i believe a diplomatic relationship is better than no relationship at all. some may argue that i have wasted my time. pakistan is no closer to us than before. they have now drifted even

further away. i disagree. military cooperation is warming. information flow between us and across the border is quickening. transparency is returning slowly. with pakistan's help, we have disrupted al qaeda and its senior leadership in the border regions and degraded its ability to plan and conduct of terror attacks. i think we would be and a far tougher situation, in the wake of the frost in this which fell over us after the been lawton -- after the bin laden raid, if we could not at least have a conversation about what is ahead. what matters most is moving forward. the relationship must be guided by clear principles. we can no longer focused solely on the most obvious is used. we should help create more

stakeholders in pakistan's prosperity, help pakistan a people address their economic, political, and internal security challenges, and promote indian- pakistan a cooperation on the basis of true, sovereign equality. it cannot always be about counter-terrorism. not in the long run. success will require efforts outside the realm of security. we much -- we must keep this partner set -- this partnership which will clarify and codify our relationship. we must work toward a reconciliation process inside afghanistan that provides for redress of grievances and a state-to-state interaction to addressed mutual concern. we must make clear to friends and enemies alike that american commitments are not defined by boots on the ground but rather by persisting, open, mutually

beneficial engagement. that leads me to iraq where we are ending our mission and setting the stage for a long- term strategic partnership. we are on pace to remove all of the troops by the end of the year. as you know, we are also in discussions with the iraqi government about the possibility of leaving behind a residual training force. no final decisions have been made by either our government or there's a, but i can tell you the focus of the discussions remain centered on capability. the sorts of capabilities the iraqis believe they need and relieved we can offer them. i know you share my conviction that having shed the blood we have said -- the blood we have said, we owe it not just to the

iraqi people but to the memories of those who never made it home to get this partnership right for the future. i came into this job hobbled by the scope of these efforts and the sorts of challenges that exist by wars in i iraq and afghanistan that were headed in the right direction. we are satisfied in the knowledge of one of those wars is ending well while the other certainly could if local issues are addressed. i leave humbled by the performance and resilience of men and women in uniform and their families who did not shrink from duty when do the send them in harm's way. again, thank you for all you have done to make possible what they have done. >> general, on behalf of every member of this committee and the senate and all of the people who we represent, we thank you for that extraordinary service, your statement is well about our

troops. hopefully there will be time for a second round read we never know that. let me go back to pakistan. you made a very strong statement is giving pakistan safe haven to the al qaeda group. they are attacking our people. the afghan troops and the coalition troops. i totally share that and i want to ask the secretary the first question. i assume from your statement that you share what admiral mullen said. you share his thoughts about the need for pakistan to end the safe haven situation. >> absolutely. >> you said the other day that

we are not going to allow these types of attacks to go on. can you make it clear what kind of options are available to us to stop those attacks if the pakistan is will not prevent them from happening? >> i have made clear that we are going to do everything we have to do to defend our forces. i do not think it would be helpful to describe what those options would look like and talk about what operational steps we may or may not take. i think the first order of business is to put as much pressure on pakistan as we can to deal with this issue from their side. en has met with their director. there has been a clear message to them and to others that they must take steps to prevent the

safe haven. we cannot allow these types of terrorists to be able to go into afghanistan, attacked our forces, and returned to pakistan for safe haven. and not face any type of pressure from the pakistanis for that to stop. >> that has been our position for some time. we have for their excuses for some time as well. when i pressed galani for not publicly condemning those attacks, he replied that he had. i asked him to provide public clippings anti backed off. he then said he made statements but not publicly. a number of our leaders have told the pakistanis that we are

going to have to take steps to end these attacks. even though you are not able to outline those types of possibilities publicly, would you say that the pakistan leaders are aware of what options are open for -- are open to us so they are not qualified surprise if we do take steps against their network? >> i do not think there would be surprised by the actions we might or might not take. >> admiral, on the troop reductions in pakistan, the president has announced that after the surge forces are returned home, the 33,000 by next summer, that he is going to -- that the troops will continue to come home at a steady pace.

as afghan security forces moved into the lead. is that a position or policy that you support? >> i do. >> admiral, is it your assessment that the nato training mission is on track to build an afghan army capable of assuming security responsibility in afghanistan in accord with the timetable that has been set? >> from my own perspective on the training mission, we go back a couple of years. sometimes we understate the significant improvements. we have no structure, meaning schools, classrooms, curriculum, etc. i think bill caldwell and a lot of other people have focused on this in a way that has provided

a dramatic breakthrough and ramp up of security force capability. many of us, a couple of years ago, yourself included, were increasingly concerned about the police in particular. police training and getting them on the street. that gap has been significantly close. the issue of illiteracy, which was a huge issue and still remains a challenge, we have put in place a literacy training which has been very effective. we see them out now trained during a week. during one week, we have something like 35,000 police in the training. we are putting in place branch schools for their army. we have improved the training capacity and capability for the

air force. we have made great strides there. they are more and more into taking the lead in the field. i am encouraged by the advancements -- there are a lot of tough issues left with respect to them. the way it is being integrated is a great improvement. i think, so far, it has been very successful. we are by no means where we need to be at this moment. there is a lot of hard work left. >> will this allow us to me the calendar? >> as far as i can see. >> thank you. relative to our iraq, let me ask you this question. there is a security agreement which was entered into by president bush and the prime minister in 2008 which set a deadline of december 31 of this year for the withdrawal of the remaining u.s. troops in iraq.

after 8.5 years of conflict in iraq, the end of this year is going to mark the completion of the transition of responsibility theiraq's security and government of all iraq. what you have testified to today is that what we are considering is a training mission. at the request of the iraqis so that that particular part of our presence could remain if it is negotiated and agreed to. the chief of staff for the army has cautioned publicly that we should avoid creating the impression of a large american presence and iraq by agreeing to have too many soldiers, u.s. soldiers, in that country after the deadline to withdraw.

do you, first of all, have you read those comments or have you talked to him about this? do you basically agree that that appearance needs to be avoided? >> i actually did talk to him about his comments. we had a very good discussion about that. >> i assume you urged him to keep the comments private while the president is considering his decision. >> we talked about -- there was no more -- there was no one more sensitive when he was a commander on the ground over there than from some of us in washington. >> putting that aside, in terms of a mission in a iraq, would you agree to we must be careful to avoid keeping a large number of troops in iraq. first of all it would be inconsistent with the agreement

that president obama has agreed to and it would unleash some street demonstrations that could result in instability. whenever we are negotiating should be at the request of the iraqis and we should be careful in terms of the numbers we might negotiate. >> i think we have to be very careful about the numbers. for me, a very high level, the most critical part of this is to get the strategic partnership right. we are in the middle of negotiations right now with respect to what do the iraqis want? what can the iraqi political leadership delivered? as the secretary said, there has been no determination and no decision at this point. >> the issue is not what the iraqis want, the issue is what we believe is going to be appropriate, if anything, after they make a request. >> i think it will be. that is part of the negotiation.

>> do you want to add anything to that in terms of continuing training missions in a iraq? >> i think it is important that the whole purpose of these negotiations is to listen to what is it that they need in order to ensure that they can provide a security to ensure that they can deal with the threat of terrorism, in order to ensure that they can take the steps necessary to be able to deal with security threats within the country. we have got to listen to their needs, taken into consideration, indicate what can be provided in order to meet those concerns, and, through a process of negotiation, arrive at what that is going to look like. that is the process going on now. clearly, it is going to be limited. it is not going to reflect the numbers we have had in the past. it does have to meet their

needs. that is what is being negotiated by general austin as we speak. >> senator mccain. >> i do not want to waste the time of the committee with my questioning, but the fact is that one of the reasons why the system has been delayed as much as it has is because the iraqis wanted to know what our assessment was as to how many troops should be there. that has not been forthcoming and it is difficult for the iraqis to make a decision without us making our input into what those needs are. if we are basing it all on iraqis needs, that is an incomplete picture because we need to know what america's national security needs are as a paramount reason for leaving american troops in harm's way. admiral, do you believe u.s. forces should remain in the disputed territories of no. i

iraq as part of the post-2011 mission? >> that is a very contentious area. >> do you believe or not believe -- >> i think the security posture in that area has to be such that that does not in any way shape or form block. -- blow up. it is a tough area. what should happen is a product of these negotiations. >> you will not give me your opinion as to whether we need to have a residual peacekeeping force in northern i iraq post- 2011? >> very recently, there is still a very contentious debate about -- >> i was asking for your opinion. >> yes. its composition is to be determined.

>> every no. i have heard is at least 5000 troops would be needed in that area to prevent what has been a volatile area. if we were not there, there probably would have been conflict. from a military strategic standpoint, how beneficial would it be if the president decided to delay the departure of the remaining surge forces from the summer of next year to the end of next year? >> from the standpoint, we are now into afghanistan? from the standpoint, as i testified before, in terms of risk, the commander -- every commander would like as much combat power for as long as possible. i think there is increased risk. although, to get it done by the end of summer -- and i said to

the chairman of little while ago that i support the president's policy. the general is working for what it will be for this year. he has not worked through it for next year. that will be based on conditions on the ground. generally speaking, a commander is going to walk combat power for as long as possible. that said, the decision has been made to bring them out by the end of summer. i think that while the rest is up, it is manageable and that there is no questioning we can get there and sustain the military success and the military components of the campaign. >> there is no doubt that every military leader, including general allan, has testified openly that by accelerating the withdrawal it does increase the military risk. >> it does increase the military risk. >> yes, the military risks.

>> if i could just say one more thing quickly. one of the things that we have learned, and all of you have gone to a iraq and afghanistan certainly longer than i. i started in 2004. we learned a lot about the importance of composition of forces in addition to just sheer numbers. there has been pressure on both sides of this issue in two countries. that is something that i take away at the end of my tour. it is not just simply about numbers. in afghanistan in particular, it is the combined security forces. the afghan security forces are going to be in a lot better shape. so, at this part, that is the lesson i have learned. >> getting back to iraq. it is not a training mission, it is a peacekeeping mission.

if you are defining it as a training mission, you have not got the complete picture that i have. mr. secretary, you have stated publicly, and i appreciated very much, the degree of cooperation between the terrorist network and isi. the ammonium nitrate factories. the attack base at the hotel. you said you could not share with us the operational options that you have. i understand that. but we better understand what the options are to bring about a change in the present status quo which is not acceptable which is the terrorist network killing americans and that being supported by pakistanis.

congress has a role to play, not only in policy but in funding. you're going to have a real uphill battle in convincing congress to maintain a level of funding assistance to pakistan unless there is some change. as i said, i do not know exactly what the way through this is. as i mentioned earlier, we all know that we tried cutting off all relations once and that did not turn out well. i strongly recommend that you start discussing with members of congress what our options are to try to bring about a change in the status quo. finally, as of tuesday's killing of former president ribbani, it showed that the taliban does not want to reconcile. it wants to murder and maim its way to victory. >> there is a question that,

when that happens and it is done by the taliban, it is an indication that that particular faction, that that individual was from, is not interested in pursuing reconciliation. they are blowing up a peacemaker in that process. it does raise concerns. it raises suspicions. nevertheless, i think we have to continue to try to pursue the opportunities that are out there. but we ought to do it with our eyes open. we ought to do it understanding who we are dealing with and where they're coming from and not expect that this is going to be easy. >> my time has expired. general allan said it is clear that the taliban has the highest

priority of winning on the battlefield. would you agree with that? >> from everything i have seen, they continue to pursue their goals. i do not think we can underestimate where they are coming from. the best single we consent to the taliban is that we are going to continue to fight them and we are going to continue to be there and we are not going anywhere. if we can send that signal, i think that, more than anything, would influence their willingness to develop reconciliation. >> to some degree, that is becoming more and more aspiration of. the discussion i had with general allen earlier this week, kishi's -- he sees their leadership in the field are more disgruntled. their morale is down. it is harder to resource them. i agree that that is what they would like to accomplish. there are moving further away from accomplishing that part of their mission. >> i wish we were sending as clear signal as you just

described. >> i want to thank admiral mullen for his outstanding service to the nation. >> welcome, mr. secretary. let me also thank admiral mullen 4 is extraordinary service to the nation. great integrity, intelligence, and remarkable service. in your opening comments, you mentioned have you have been the principal intermediary with the pakistan a general. when history is written, your name will be written. especially at the time around the border and it was critical in making that happen. you have expressed the complex relationship you have with pakistan. they are at times helping us

immeasurably and other times aiding people you are attacking us. correct me if i am wrong, but there are two points that i hope you are making. one is that we will have a presence in afghanistan after 2014. a robust counter-terrorism presence, a training presence, and assistance presence. because one of the notions running around is that we are going to be all out by 2014. it will be pakistan exclusive. the second point that you have raised and correct me if you think i am wrong is that when we come out, or come down in 2014, we will not have to rely on lines of communication through pakistan or other support mechanisms this -- other support

mechanisms they provide. is that accurate? have those point in may? >> from my perspective, it is important to note that while we continue on this path to shift lead security responsibility to the afghans by the end of 2014, while there may be some ongoing discussions about what is next, the discussions that i have seen essentially model that it is not unlike iraq. a training mission and a negotiation with the afghans about what the long-term strategic relationship will be. i think the strategic partnership declaration currently being negotiated is so important. that really is a commitment. we are going to be there longer than 2014. not unlike pakistan, we left afghanistan in 1989. they remember that. that long-term commitment is critical. there are pieces of it that we have not put together. there are people that we can

speculate about that. what the composition might be. i honestly do not know. there has been no determination except to say there is a long- term commitment. how we view that, which will be critical, is going toif we leavl be back. it will only get worse. would have unstable countries, one with nuclear weapons. there's a correlation of them without this. >> we are going to have this. it cannot be the same. we are not going to depend upon the gasoline.

crimea i am wrong. because it's so give us more operational flexibility. i think they will appreciate it. >> they're working hard to create other options. there lot of difficulties associated with it. we will not be completely done with meeting the gramm lot. >> from the very beginning, we will have an enduring presence there. with regard to the agreement, it is clear that as we drop down

and tried to provide this transition, that in the future we have to be prepared to listen to their knees. and what they will need in terms of security in the future. we need to ensure that all of the gains we made will continue in the right track. >> as we come, we have increased burdens. there has been a remarkable progress.

with respect i would have to thing that the strongest element we have is the national security forces. this is a long-term effort. then the question comes. it consumes, the 40's some of the budget. it is not only for how we begin to bring down this of what happens between now and 2014.

there's a possibility to lay out an approach that we bring incapable police. and billy, these are the easier areas. we have some more difficult ones to do with. as the transition, there is a confident military force. we will have a chance to see this take place.

there are making progress and reducing the cost. this is not because we ought to bear. >> thank you. i want to echo the remarks. i was jotting down your opening statement.

when he made the statement, i was thinking that was just unique to me. at one of them talk about how we cannot allow this mission not to be carried through. that is difficult. it is not just oklahoma. the second thing i think he said that is significant is looking at any future cuts and what they come to, would be devastating to our ability. when you talk about the force, the easy thing to do is to put all the resources.

what gets neglected? if we do not do that, we will have the force. how you going to avoid the hollow force? >> it to reduce everything by some kind of percentage across the board. the result is that training has weakened. the force has weakened. they did not have the what burnley. my approach is to look at a key area. it is to take everything down by

certain percentage. >> i hope you'll be looking to with the future in terms of modernization. i know this is what he meant and what you would do. let me ask both of you. assuming that a lot of the american people do not think about that. each month goes by, the terrorist grain greater capability. we're talking but delivering systems and all of that. on his concern is each time a goes by he was referring to this. the capability is increasing. this ties into something that i thought was a mistake in making

withdrawal date. tore telling the enemy what do. they do not know this. what we have to do is i think demonstrate as strategic patient that is necessary to win a long war. we have to bring those to bear. it just causes a lot. in terms of the concepts besetting the states, to you believe this?

do you think that demonstrates the patients u.s. talking about the deaths what is your feeling about the withdrawal? >> i understand your view. my approach is that the most important is that if we can send a meteorite we pay attention to conditions on the ground. the key is making this transition work. making sure the areas remain secure and that stability is put in place, making sure we do not allow the country to ever again become a safe haven. that is might test.

we have differences over that perio. how do conduct is in a way that means clear? >> i have to say this. this thing that is happening in terms of the training program, i was over there in newsday. we look at what is happening in the training center.

there's this segregation between this and artillery. i applaud everyone that had anything to do that. this is about $12 billion a year. i would hope you look at the successes. >> this is exactly what you said. the office report is this. this has been on the unlisted side. in a great improvement.

they have returned because of the analysis. when a 12 billion a year is not going to work. he has a lot of confidence in that work. i am very encouraged with where we are. >> the or new in this area. i would hope that nothing is done that is good to change it.

>> thank you. let me begin by turning everyone else. they're adding a particular note. we had the pleasure for more news in the can ask. and how you can measure the journey. from day one has always been n known for his forthrightness and integrity. it has been great to work with the.

he has an enormous things. thank you so much for your service. afford to seen the. it occurred to me that we tend to go task only have these discussions. we should be struggling here with a strategic and operational model that we should be using. i have proved that the models of the cost 10 years, we ought to have a better idea in terms of how we're going to move into the

future. we can start with the models of iraq. is clear we have inherited certain responsibilities. we ended up as an occupying force in the middle of secretary of violence. we have seen the empowerment of their run. -- of iran. we can go to the afghanistan model. we have assumes the risk of any suspense of nation-building. we do not know what the outcome will be.

we have seen this in libya. we have seen unbridled presidential discretion. there's a humanitarian mission in order to introduce the american military into the operations. this is a complex. we do not have to discuss this with the congress. we have the use of special operations.

we are attacking terrorists. all of these are occurring in areas which have fragile government assistance or no government will systems. what have we learned from this tax what is the model for the future for how we define the ?xistential threat stack this is your final voyage. i like to hear your thoughts. >> i appreciate not only your comments but the friendship that is pretty special because of where we came from. i think what we hear some degree

learning as we go. this is not withstanding whether we should have gone there are not. once we were there, and they need to shift. there is a development of an understanding we forgotten about. it is with regard to where we are. the leftist under resource in afghanistan. it has shifted their.

it is not just one country anymore. i hear the embodiment peace. and get that. i have watched them in ways with what happened in the arab spring. it is rejected out there. it is continuing to be rejected. the president's decision with respect to libya was a completely different way to support the overall thing. hysterically we beat nato to death. we have not heard a word today. it is extraordinary when nato is on these things versus were they were to three years ago.

we could see europe take the lead there. i think all of that -- and i take does this well. a light to carefully look of the lessons. and now it is very much one at a time. we have this very well controlled.

you posed very important and difficult questions. it is not going to get any easier. it will continue to rise. as difficult as this has been is a very important effort. >> you raise some very important issues. this is a very inappropriate time to raise his questions. trying to trim this from the defense budget.

what kind of defense system doing to build? part of this has to be based on the dress letter out there. we will continue to have a threat from terrorism. you have to confront that. i do not think it means to put 150,000 people into it. there are ways to do that better much more effective and agile. this is an area we continue to talk about. they have to be prepared with the threats. we have to confront china. there challenges and other rising powers.

what kind of force doing need to have that would make as effective that dealing with those threats? need your guidance. did we want the country to have the patience, with respect to fighting a long war, it is due to more important. >> thank you for the good discussions. this is the positioning.

>> i find this to be 84% entry. this is a significant increase. the costs are beginning to come down. because of both wars continuing the operation. the cost was about $1.30 china. it to be more than 10% of that.

it did cost us a lot of blood. we should never underestimate that. i am on the budget committee. they're really tough. i believe they have to tighten the balance sheet. you have spoken about the greatest threat to our national security is our debt. the 450 billion is the amount that was part of the debt ceiling. the debt ceiling takes the ceiling down about $450 over 10

years. it is pushed to 10%. the challenge i know you are faced with is what happens. hmm looks like a dumb be about 850 billion. -- it looks like it will be about $850 million. is that acceptable? is that an acceptable reduction? >> it is not only just the amount, it is peanut butter. it has a good chance of breaking

us. it puts it in a position of not keeping faith. kines to be reset and everything else. there's equipment for the future. if we are not able to, it's a hollow us out. i think we do need to participate. we have to have a strategy. we have to have different views of the future. this is a much more dangerous time.

the world keep showing up on our doorstep for the use of the military. the have to be judicious about that. we have to look at how we will do this. we look into the abyss of what it would be if we have roughly doubled that. i think you would be incredibly dangerous for the security to go there. >> said is correct. the defense budget is 529. >> we have the same problem you have here. yes it is 10%.

whenever on discretionary accounts. the mandatory pays it. we get smaller faster. i think we could get significantly smaller faster. >> i think we can break the military. they are willing to take their share of their cuts. it can be very demoralizing if there is a perception that they have been targeting for exceptional coz the others are not taking.

would you not agree? >> i've seen myself. there is concern for changing their retirement system on the immediate horizon. we agreed that if we make these changes that we grandfather improperly. they should not be willing to do it at an exceptional level. last year, we had the flat budget. we got no increase.

we're talking about 15 sir more more. the food stamp problem has gone up. in the last year, are non- defense discretionary went up 24%. they need to reach an agreement. there are some reductions in spending.

medicaid and the food stamps are exempted under the sequester. >> thank you for your strong opening statement. would you like to comment? >> having worked on a number of budgets, they ultimately did do this. if the idea is that you can rely on sequester, that is an irresponsible view. it involved entitlement programs.

we develop these kinds of doomsday mechanisms, the hope they'll do the right thing. the irresponsibly produce the irresponsibility does lead people to look at the entire -- the response ability does live with people to look at the entire budget. you have got to be willing to put all this done on the table. >> it has succeeded in balancing the budget. would you agree that the depth of our challenges is far greater than it was made that if she met last time?

>> last time we did that i thought we were in bohol a -- vallhalla and that we could operate on a balanced budget. unfortunately, that happened. it is much worse than it was. it is a huge challenge. it works with the administration. >> thank you. >> i want to say good morning. i join my colleagues in thanking

you for your many years of service to our countries. what to say hello to you. i want to thank all men and women in uniform. we all know we face difficult decisions regarding our future. our soldiers, airmen, marines continue to serve with honor and distinction. we're proud of you. >> the release an audit showing

efforts to track the billions of dollars since 2002 has been hampered by numerous practice. as you look to the future, there are some adjustments being made. it increases the accountability of how these dollars are being spent. >> one of my concerns is that we have to be able to get the books of the defense department. the effort right now is on track. we have to be accountable to the

american people about how these dollars are being spent. a basically urge all of the people to do everything necessary to try to speed the process of so that we can track these dollars and make sure they're getting the best bang for the buck. >> they raided three additional units. as we continue to transition regions, what are the remaining units that are working to achieve this rating level? >> my understanding is that the

number of unions that have the capability has gone up. >> there are more unicef operational better able to go into battle. they will be conducted in order to defeat the taliban. we are seeing this. it has taken a lot of work. we are engaging in battle. if we're going to be able to make this transition, we have to make sure all the units have that capability. >> they are rated at the top three proficiency levels. their apartment.

this is a far cry from where we were to over 80 months ago. there's an awful lot of hard work that is left. it has been extremely successful. we see nothing that gets in the way of them continuing to take the lead and become more proficient said that they can have it thrust the country. >> it is treated in 2006. they're all sorts of devices.

what is your assessment of how they are achieving their mission? >> i think they will join the organization. it has been a great success. it is heavily focused. it had an enormous impact. it has been led by someone who has been in fight. it is extremely difficult. the enemy is shifting more and more to a very hocus heavy

focus -- heavy focus on ied. i appreciate the efforts on the part of many here. senator kennedy is leading the effort. there is a view that we should integrate this into our overall organization. i am not there yet. i think we need to wait until it is more obvious. it'll bring an outfit to parade rest. it is too vital for overall time. >> you are an outstanding leader.

this is the last four decades. in your view, aside from budgetary issues, what do you see as the biggest challenge facing our military in the future? >> i think we're able to retain the one, we are the most combat experience force in our history. it is the biggest threat to ourselves. if we keep the people right, if we're able to ensure it is there, it stays whole of

whatever size, i think we can address whatever threats are out there and provide the military capabilities. our care has to be so precise that we do not break it. if we get that right, i think we will be ok for the future. >> thank you very much. thank you for your service. thank you. >> thank you. thank you. i want to thank both of you for being here today. we will miss having you before this committee. thank you for your service to this country. i wanted to ask you about this.

there was this engagement rate. 27% means that out of the detainees that have been repatriated there are 161 who knew we have either confirmed or suspected of korean gaging in terrorist activity or insurgent activities that put our troops in danger. would you agree with me that it is unacceptable? >> we cannot allow that to

happen. we are going back to kill our forces. i have to certify that the transfer has taken all the precautions necessary. you can be assured that i'm not going to certify unless i'm sure that is going to have them. >> you said you cannot allow someone to be transferred from guantanamo to another country. i appreciate that. one of the issues i would ask you about is if tomorrow we capture a high value terrace outside of iraq and afghanistan.

with a print them. >> we're looking at day case by case approach. he was a terrorist to relocate it and captured. there is a decision made that he could be prosecuted in the courts. with regard to the ability of being detained, there are laws of this.

the answers to that are not very good right now. >> we need a long-term detention policy. >> i pre with what you're saying. there's not a military commander out there that wants to take a back. none of us want to see that happen here i think the case is instructive. this has limits. you do not want them all tied up. in fact moving in that direction.

he is being kept right now. there is a point or he can be prosecuted. it'll take everybody getting together. without that, it does given us this return rate. i put in a very tough spot. >> we cannot do that with every single individual . is it a practical reality? >> not really. >> one of the concerns i have is the general holder claim they

would close guantanamo bay prior to the 2012 presidential election. my concern is hearing what you said is what our military's have said before. right now we do not have an alternative. it is important that we not pay a political considerations ahead and making sure these individuals get back in to further harm us. they are not adding to the guantanamo population. at the same time, congress has made clear that there's no other place where we will be able to put these individuals do

legislation. to have to be able to resolve the for the benefit of this country. i would hope working together with the congress we could find a way to deal with this. >> i hope so. i think it is a top rate of tension -- top rate detention facility. it is important. they are so angry. i want to ask you about i ram -- iran. how would you describe the activities? they are attacking the troops.

>> over the summer, there is a spike into what the secretary said earlier with respect. we went by several channels. iraq went to i ran. it stopped. they're getting bigger and better. there is a great downside potential for destabilizing.

it is up to them. they have been warned. it is consistent with what the secretary has said. this will not be something that we will sit idly by and watch. as you look at troop levels, it is in our national security interest. we do not allow them to be in a situation where they have a greater influence than we would want them to given our posture.

we have to make sure we have enough troops to secure it. thank you. >> thank you. this is the real deal. and never data for a minute you were giving me the honest assessments of any question. -- i never thought for a minute you're giving me an honest assessment of any question. i want to talk about sustainability. i think that the military has done a good job of figuring out

how we work with a counterinsurgency situation. sure we focus on sustainability. afghanistan has somewhere between $2,000,000,000.- 1294967773 dollars gdp. it is what we're urging for infrastructure. i have yet to get anybody explain to me how the afford the army we are building for them. we build a university for them for their military that will cost $40 million a year just to maintain and operate.

the other part before i their speak.either of oyou how do we spent 300 million taxpayer dollars for a power plant that they cannot afford to operate now? this is used every once in awhile. cannot remember which one they're buying. it is a much cheaper cost.

i am worried that we're throwing money at something that is not sustainable. >> this is a critical issue that we want to understand. it is not finished. and is not anything close. it has to be less at best and ordered to be able to sustain a parent needs to be shared with other partners. it allows them to provide for security.

we just got them to a point where we started to build them up. your questions are ballot. we're asking them of ourselves. i do not associated with the gdp this year. there's an opportunity to develop. it is a question afghans seniors are starting to understand. i do not think you have any class answers here. i think we will know a lot more about this. questions about the one you raised to have a better perspective. i do not know enough about the electric plant. it is the same kind of question. we are looking at it.

it is the state department and other agencies as well. >> we have spent $70 billion in afghanistan just on reconstruction development. this is not any of our ongoing training of the military. i really do think it is important you both require your replacement and the senior leadership of all of our military to read the contract summary report. it is an eye opening piece of work. it is made up of a lot of expertise.

it is really frustrating when you realize how fast has played with the money. i need to know who is making the decision on the $400 million. it i do not know of the american people are aware.

. .

an assembly of people in contradiction with the inner human instincts and dispositions, who also have no faith in god and of the divine profits. they have a lust for power and materialistic ends. to them only power and wealth prevails. those nations have no hope to protect their legitimate rights against these powers.

these powers seek progress through the poverty, debilitation, and in violation of the others. they consider themselves superior to others, enjoying special privileges. special privileges. they have no respect for others and violates the rights of all nations and governments. they proclaim themselves as the indisputable custodians of all other men and nations through intimidation and through force and the abuse of international mechanisms. they insist on imposing their lifestyle and beliefs on others. they officially support racism. they weaken a country's through

military intervention and destroy their infrastructure in order to plunder their resources by making them all the more dependent. they sew the seeds of hate it among nations in order to prevent them from fulfilling their goals of development and progress. all cultural identities, lives, and values, and " of nations, human values, women, children, and young people are sacrificed by those tendencies and the inclination to enslave and captivate other nations. hypocrisy and deceit. drug trafficking and killing of innocent human beings are also

allowed in pursuit of diabolicals. afghanistan,ce in even with that, there's been a dramatic increase in [unintelligible] they always put themselves in position of the claimant, by ticng their imperialists nex [unintelligible] they sanction anyone who questions the holocaust. concerning the elements involved in the september 11 incident, they brought an idea and my

country and myself came under pressure and under threat by the government of the united states. instead of assigning a if fact- finding team, they killed the main perpetrators. and threw his body into the sea. would it not have been reasonable to bring to justice and try openly the main perpetrator of the incident in order to identify the evidence and reason behind the safe space for the aircraft to attack the world trade center twin towers?

is there any classified information that must be kept secret? they look at zionism as a sacred notion or ideology. anything that question that is condemned as an unforgivable sin. however, they endorse and acknowledged sacrilegious statement on the other religions. real freedom, justice, and dignity, well-being, and lasting security are the rights of all nations. these values can neither be achieved by reliance on the current inefficient system of world governments north through the intervention of the world

arrogant powers and the gun battles of nato forces. these volumes could -- these values can only be realized under independence. is there any way to address the problems and challenges besetting the world by using the prevailing international mechanisms or tools to help humanity achieve co longstanding aspiration of peace, security, and equality? all those who tried to introduce reforms have failed. the valuable efforts made by the movement and groups as by some prominent individuals have failed to bring fundamental changes although they had their own effect and impact.

governors and management of the world pintails fundamental reform. but what has to be done now? efforts must be made with a firm resolve and through collective cooperation to map out a new plan on the basis of principles and on the foundation of human universal values such as monotheism, justice, freedom, love, and the quest for happiness. based on happiness on all, the united nations remains an important creation of mankind. its capacity must be used to the extent possible for noble goals. we should not allow the

organization, which is the reflection club a collective will and shared aspiration of the community of nations, to deviate from its main course and play into the hands of the world powers. we must ensure collective participation and involvement of nations in an effort to promote lasting peace and security. shared and collective management of the world must be achieved in its true sense and based on the underlying principles enshrined in the international law and justice must serve as the criterion and the basis for all international decisions or actions. all of us should acknowledge the fact that there is no other way than the shared and collective management of the world in order

to put an end to the present disorder, tierney, antidiscrimination worldwide. -- tyranny, and discrimination. while acknowledging the truth, one should know it's not enough. spare no effort toward its realization. dear colleagues and friends, shared and collective management of the world is the right of all nations. we as their representatives have an obligation to defend their rights. although some hours continuously tried to postulate all international efforts aimed at promoting collective cooperation, we must however

strengthen our belief in achieving the perceived goal of establishing a shared and establishing a shared and collective collabor cooperationo run the world. the united nations was created have many nations involved in decisions. this goal has not been filled because of the absence of justice in the current management structures and mechanisms of the united nations. the composition of the security council is unjust and inequitable. therefore, changes and structure of the united nations are considered as the basic demands of the nations that must be addressed by the general assembly. during the last session i

emphasize the importance of this issue and called for the designation of this decade as the decade of shared and collective global management. and that all capacities and resources must be mobilized in a -- in that. i would like to reiterate my proposal. i'm sure that through international cooperation, efforts of committed to world leaders or governments and through the insistence on justice and the support of all other nations, we can expedite the building of a common bright future. this movement is certainly on the task of creation with the assurance of a promising future for humanity, a future that will be built when humanity

initiates' to tread the path of the divine profits and under the leadership of iman al mahdi, the savior, to all divine messengers, are great profit. -- our great profit. creation of a supreme and ideal society with the arrival of a perfect human being who is a true lover of all human beings is the guarantee promise of allah. he will come with jesus christ

to lead the freedom lovers and justice lovers to eradicate discrimination and to promote knowledge, peace, justice, freedom, and love across the world. he will present to every single individual all the beauty of the world and all the things which bring happiness for mankind and which give the promise of a better tomorrow to all humanity and free pace of life to all. friends and colleagues, today with the increase in public awareness, nations no longer succumbed to oppression and discrimination.

the world is now witnessing more than ever the widespread awakening in islamic lands, in asia, in europe, and in america. everyday these movements are ever expanding, every day there's influence to pursue the realization of justice, freedom, and the creation of a better tomorrow. our great nation -- our nation that built a great civilization in history stands ready to join hands with other nations to march on this beautiful passth in harmony and in line with the shared aspirations of

mankind. let us salute love, freedom, justice, knowledge, and the bright future that awaits human kind. i thank you all, ladies and gentlemen. >> you don't play politics at the time of national crisis. you don't play politics with the economy and you never, ever play politics with people's jobs. >> with the the british house of commons in recess, the annual party conferences are under way in the u.k. watch the british prime minister deputy this sunday at 9:00 on c- span. in the weeks ahead, party conferences with labor party leader ed miliband and conservative prime minister david cameron. >> british prime minister david cameron also spoke at the united

nations on thursday before travelling to canada to address parliament. this 30-minute event is courtesy of canada oppose a cable public affairs channel. cable public affairs channel.

>> order. i will call all the right honorable prime minister to take the podium. [applause] >> (voice of translator): thank you, dear colleagues. the honourable speaker >> thank you, dear colleagues, senators and members. justice ad justices of the supreme court, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen. [end of translation] >> it's eat privilege all of us to welcomto our parliament today the prime minister of the united northern ireland, the right minister of the united northern ireland, the right honourable david cameron. [ applause ]

>> on a personal note, david i have seen you rtly and often, many times in fact both asder of the opposition and prime minister in great britain and around the wo but it is special pleasure to meet you here incanada where you are jng a distinguished register of british prime ministers who have addressed this chamber. >> (voice of translator): for example, most recently, in 2001, the right honourable tony blair spoke before the house. [end of translation] >> margaret thatcher spoke in this place on two occasions and perhaps most famously, right here in 1941 during some of the darkest days of the second world war war that sir urchille his fs speech t d so much to rall spirits onoth sides of the atlantic. your predeces, sir any edenledappearin this use and i quote an almost ting expnce for the

let ssure you that he found as you will that in the traditions we inhered from your own country that the commons treats itssitors much better than we do each commons treats itssitors much better than we do each her. >>ice of translator): once again, we welcome you and we look forward to hearing from [end of translation]nts. >> i ask the indulgence of this house to refer briefly to those security matters and onomic matters that brought prminister cameron and myself together usually with other worldeaders no less thanen times during the st 16 months. matters i must say in which prime minister cameron's leship has bee decisive. matters that willtinue to purpose, such as in libya. >> (voice of translatoi'm thinking particularly of the role that our two countries

have played with the critical assistance of our other great mother country, france, a the efforts made to help the libyan people build a better future. and this undertaking we have been inspired by certain fundamental beliefs. [end of translation] >> the state is made for man and not man for the state as the r honoue ld illan oved this very cer. wealso bve thatn w help os toefree, it is r ow libeat wo thos anci rights deacy and rule of law are also the cont share aspirations of millions of people around the world theye clearly the aspirations of the libyan people themselves and our mutual hope is that they'll some day enjoy them in all mutual hope is that they'll some day enjoy them in all eir full.

[ applause ] >> (voice of translator): and, of course, tre are also the very grave problem that are battering the world economy that unite us as partners o the g-20. [end of translation] >> -- will be skusd of exaggerating if we acknowledge the immediate test to avoid a return global recession. yet without ski countries, taking systemicly appropriate andoordinated economic measures without resistance to preciousism and acceptance of more flexible exchange rates, without fiscal con some addition and above all else without a will to address growing uncertainty to decisively tac what are in some cases taing dangerous and unsustainable levels of national indebtedness without actions on these matters, the world will not avoid such

consequences. >> (voice of translator): i would therefore like to miniameron on the issuesuse ofrent economi of tranion] >> second conventional ng of the difficult scal choices confronting the british economy. truly among our g-20 partners prime minister cameron has truly among our g-20 partners prime minister cameron has been a leade by example. [ applause ] >> rt. hon. sthen harper: prime ster her canada owed yo progress carefully and i can safely say where it matters most, your thinking parallels that of our own government. to be precise,hileficit

reduction is not an end, the g-20 fiscal targets agreed to lastr remain an essential element for rebuilding economic health of industrializations. >> (voice of trator):ike you prime minister we are combining thesals with a cl plan to stimulate job creati and economic growth. later this year, the leaders of t g-20 will meet in es. [end of translation] t. hon. stephen harper: i dare say when we g the in cannes will have much to occupy us at g-20. honourable members, without furtherado it does give me grtasure to introduce to you a man of immenseevolve and principle action, a great find of mine, a great friend of nada, the prime minister of britain, theht of nada, the prime minister of britain, theht honour david con. applause

>> mr. speaker, mr. speaker of the sen mr.me minister,onourable members of senate and members of the house of commons thank you for that incredibly warm welcome. as y said, steph this does remind me of home. it's just a little bit bigger. does remind me of home. it's just a little bit bigger. and a lot better behaved. [ speaking in french ] >> (voice of translator): i thank you for the great honour that you have bestowed upon me by inviting m to address this historic parlit. [end of translation] -- should preceded that with the warning win shone chill gave during one of his wartime broadcasts when he said --

take care, careful, m broadcasts when he said -- take care, careful, m going to speak french. [ applause ] >> let me begin in this place by paying be tribute to jack layton. i offer sincere condolences to owe livian and his family. his energy and his optimism were above politics and i know he'll be missed b allse were above politics and i know he'll be missed b allse whrve here plause ] >> one of t things i finding about this job is whichever country i visit, members of the royal family have got thei first. i think -- i k the duke

an duchess of cambridge, will and kate have set the bar pretty high this time. but it is a symbol of the importance of the relationship between our two countries and the long standing affection that our people show towards one another that the young royal coupl chose can canada as the destination for their first ever overseas visit and that teople here gave them such a warm ption. now sadly ion't be landing helicopter in a lakeor wearing a stetsonnd i'm sure primnister harper will be disappointed he won't bee challenge me atrodeo either. as the author briley carely set out, there is a strong arnthat the 21st century cowell be the canad century. in thet few years, canada has got every major decision right. t the facts.

not a single canad bank fell or faltered during the global banking crisis. canada got to grips with its deficit andwas running surplused payingn the debt be t rsion, wasll shi.hie sun your ecoleadersh has bettthanny ourtorfar way in which you have integrated peoplem many different backgroundsto a mature democracy is i believe a model from which we can all learn. and canada is now preparing albeis the jurisdict with the best educational results of any english speaking jurisdiction in the world. speaking jurisdiction in the world. frlackberr [ applause ] >> from blackberry to

canadarm, the robot arm used on 90s space station, yours is a home of innovation of and technology. in fact kberry presented her hajjsty the queen with one of their smart phones when she visited last year but unsurprisingly her majesty had one already. canada displays moral clarity and political leadership. canadian servicemen and women have made extraordinary sacrifices in the defe of have made extraordinary sacrifices in the defe of liberty and democracy. [ applause ] >> yet while some countries do little and talk a lot, canada isecingnd -sacrifi in i ntribution to the fight fo etter world. sois a prige for me to come heroday and to honour at you hdone

also a gre pleasur be handstandhere with m colleaand friprime nister harper. last 16months his outstanding leadership, not atst at my first summits in muskoka and toronto last year, then as now the focus of much of our efforts wa on the t iss that concern our people most, keeping them safe and getting them jobs. this evening, i want to focus my remarks on he can wo together to address some of the issues of the global economy. but let me first say something abousecuri we've all suffered from violence.c extremism and i've come from the uni nations where i've argued that the eve we've seen this year in north africa and the middle easter massive opportun to spread peace, prosperity, democracy a vitally security, but o if

we work toer to seize the opporty and to support the arab people ashey seek to fulfill aspirations for a job, a voice and ate in th society. our two countriesve always been prepared bea the burden and pay the price to our world safer and to defend our way of life. the peace tower in this 67,000 canadian lives lost in the first world war alone. britain owes an incredible debt t cannmedces i want to paybute them t. rough tw world war canada at vimy ridg pasndaele esadasthere. athesommhen our for together suffered their worst lo in his, canadaas there. inct it was after the somme that lloyd george said this, the canadians ed a part of

such distinction that forward were mar out shop troops, whenever the germans found a canadian s coming into the line, they prepared for the wors war ii, canadian naval forces helped to keep the sea lanes open during the battle of the atla. running convoys across the atlantic week after week, braving mines, submanes and blacked o silent ships, all of which provided absolutely fundamental to our ability to survive as an independent untry. and on juno beach, it was the division and the royaly canadian navy that achieved such a remarkable triumph on the firsy of those vital normandy landings. and which on d-day had got further inland that any of the five other invasion forces. today canada is as vital and influential a military partner as it has ever been.

as partners and founding members of na, our for versus been proud to serve alongside each other in international operations from bosnia to sierra leone and most recently from afghann to in afghanistan, its canad anitishce that is fought alongside eacother in south ie very tost part he count where few other nations would follow. y, canadian personnel are training the afghan national security forces. and in libya, it was a canadian general charles bouchard who commanded the nato operation. and brave canadian pilots who played such a vital in protecting civilians and helping the libyanople protecting civilians and helping the libyanople liberate theves. [ applause ]

>> mr. spea amidst all this, there could not be believe a more ing tribute to the brilliance of canadian es and our pride at standing siy-side with than the recent rena of thearitime command and airommand as the royal canadian navy and the royal airommand as the royal canadian navy and the royal dian airforce. >> prime minr harper and i will always ensure that britain and canada keep our defenses strong, but we also have topunchoveur weigh in theworld help ace freedom, democra and

securis not just about militaight alo t a dipcy,id, culture, the promo of our supp mua initiativeto on maternal and child health, launched under prime minis harper's leadership at the g-8 last year. harper's leadership at the g-8 last year. and we are investing -- [ applause ] >> and are investing in programs to save the lives of 50,000 women in pregnancy and childbirth and a qur of a million newborn babies dying needlessly. million newborn babies dying needlessly. now of course -- [ applause ] >> ofurse at a time when finances are tight, people question whether we should keep our aid commitments. i say yes. you need to be able to protect military power to protect your security and def your

values, but it is even better to mendken states and to act to stop problems before they come to our door. whether that's waves of illegal migration, the spread of diseases or new threats to our national security, take afghanistan. it would put a fraction of our current military spending on afghanistan into helping afghanistan develop 15 or 20 years ago, just think of what we might have been able to years ago, just think of what we might have been able to avoid over the last decade. [ applause ] >> o take pakista pakii childre enter life without per educa or the prospof job and headful ofemist propaganda, and whatrethe s in ter of mas even terrorism?callization and britainnd canada have never turned away from the world, so

it's right that we have met our aid commitments and i hope you will continue to join international development pars, not just for the good of the developing world, but for the safety and the security of us all. as britain and can worked together for t world security, so we must now work together on the biggest challenge this year, securing strong and sustainable growth in the global economy. now it is important that are clear about the facts. wenot quite staring down the barrel, but the pattern is clear. the very recon for the vanced emies will be difficult. growth in europe has stalled. grow in aca has stalled. the effects of the japanese earthquake, highil and food prices created a drag on growth, but fundaally we are still suffering from the

aftershocks of the world financial bust and the economic collapse in 2008. that means families in britain and canadare facing a tough time. now lieve that prime minister harper and i share the same analysis of what is wrong and what needs to be put right. theld is rering a crisnd is sring from this notditional. it's a debisis. is t le of debt, and the fear of those lev, th the usual economic prescripti cannot be applied. it is not simply a question of using conventional fiscal and monetary leverstimulate growth untconfidence and normal economictivity returns. when households have bauered too much,when banks are shrinking thealance ss and rebuilding their capital,

and wh governments are accumulating huge stocks of debt, the pow of those traditional levers is limited. th ecoc situation is much more dangerous and the solution for most countries cannot be simply to bauer more. why? because if the govent doesn't have the room to bauer more, in order to c taxors increase spending, people and markets start worrying about actually pay back its debt and when this happens, confidence ebbs away and interest rates will rise, hitting people with mortgages and hitting companies that want to bauer to invest. we can see this happening right now in some european countries. now of course there is a crucial role for monetary policy, to help support economies in the short-term. and, of course, those that have room can use fiscal levers to do the same.

yeand mrs, b bong it by rmining financial stability is lf-defea and das the confid on whi ecic gr depends tackle the funntaln must prob we must add the pem of excessive debt. let me say it again, it is a excessive debt. let me say it again, it is a debt crisis. [ applause ] >> only when we properly recogn this can we begin to address banks which are too weak to ss on lowerinterest tes to businesses and households and consume and businesses whose fear of debts mean they don't want to bauer to spend. recovery from a debt crisis is both different and more difficult than recovering from a cyclical recession. ultimatelyere are only three ways to de with the overhang of debts.

rescheduling t writing them off paying them back. highly indebted households and governments canno simply spend their way out a debt governments canno simply spend their way out a debt cris [ applause ] >> the more they spend, the hedebts willise and the more the fundamental problem will gro instead we need to confront thblems directly and i believe we need to do three things. get to grips with the debt and restore credibility and confidence. make it easier to do business our omies.obsreeing u work thercross theis, d, coording our actioncludingosting doha round.g wi the bry takiach in tur tnd foremost, wet deal direc with our debts n

britain we learned from canada's own experience when you were able to take action to pay down debt. when our government t offi in britain, in may, 2010, we inherited the big budget deficit in our peacetime history. we faced the risk of rising interest rates, falling confidence even questions about ourcredit-wyness as a country. so we've taken some really tough decisions to rescue our public finances and we've begun to ilement them. how fast you need to go will depend on circumstance with a deficit that was forecast to be the highest in the g-20, and ballooning debt, the u.k. has had to act quickly. britain's experience contains an invaluable lesson. it is possible to earn credibility and get ahead of the markets throu decisive acti by its nature, a global crisis cannot be solved by countries acting alone. in a global economy, we need every country in the world to

show leadership to adess its problems. with others, we continue to e we need to increase global demand by rebalancing and surplus countries spending more, helping deficit countries to increase their exports and grow faster. of course this is vital. and it will help the deficit countries to gr and to repay . t moreending by surplus untries not on it own (plestand by) d.

riyal, of the world economy. why? because the euro area is one of the largest markets in t world. and the euro is the world's second largest cncy. and whihese problems aren't being solved, while they grow, busses don't invest. confidence is sapped. in the euro areatsf, an increasingly worldde also. eurozone countries must act swiftly to resol the crisis. thust implement what they have agreed. they m demonstrate they have e political will to what is necessary to ensure the stability of the system. one way or mothe they have -- another they hto fd a fundamental and lasting solution to the heart of the problem,he high level of indebtednessn and whatver cost they take europe's banks need to be made

strong enough to help sport the recovery, not i a . he same e cannut the proem of t lack of compiveness man euro area ntri essly pug 0 ofhat in facttakes the problem wors it lengthenshehado of unainty thooms ovee world economy. now, when you can'tut taxes increase spending, boost demand, and when interest rates arelready low, what's left to government is to take those simple, traightforwardteps to boost the pen for growth. and we should remember that in the long term it's not fiscal policy that makes economies grow. it's making us more pductiv th is esstial for our future long term prosperity. that means making it easier to set up a new company, to employ people, to invest, to grow a business. this may sound simple, but that doesn't mean it's easy to do. you quickly find you come up

against all sorts of barrier, obstacles,egulations. inritain we are determined to address this. we are creating the most competitive corporate tax regime in the g20, cug the time it takes to set up a business, redu tax costs and regulato burdens for new businesses. we're putting up every regulation on the internet so people can clearly see what they are and which one can get rid of. and we've issued a one in one act rule so any minister who wantso bring in a new regulation has to get rid of an isting one first. (applause) e prioritizg, scice and infrastructu reformingur edation sm,ntroducing deg new appreicesps t opld i'miged we'rer yng llowin ttepsf pre nister hr hostin the next

world skills, thousan of young adults cmpeting to be the west of the bt so i argued we need t get to grips withhe over hang of debt in our national economies, tha need to make them mor cpetiti and al that a global crisi cannot be solved by countries acting alone. now, there arehose who a th interonal actio requires new global institutions. i don't agree. it's not new institions, it's political will we need and students like the g20 to develop the consensus. (applause) you can hav all the mtings, sub committees and processes in the world but ihere iso political will wel never balanced growth we need.nd that's why the polital will of leaders at the g20 summi this

november is so important. nog sums this up better than the failure to get a global trade deal. eve wee got t refight the argument for free trade all over again. and f me, the is nowhere better to do it than right here in canada, a country built on trade. because the truth is, that trade is the biggest wealth cator e evernown couldive our economiig no apletrade rou cou add 70 bon to thrld econom d yet too many petill em to bvehatde is a sortf zo s game. th tal abo it qui literally a if one country's ccess is another count's failure. they think if ou exports grow then someone else's have to rink. that somehow if we import low as if all the benits ofe're a's exports go t china

one when we actually benefit too, from choice,m competition, from low prices in our s. the whole poi of trade i that you are baking aigger cake. everyone can benef from it. so i come here to canada to stand up for free trade, to promote more tra and more investnt, between our two countries and with other countries around the world, too. (applause) at the g20 in cannes we need to agree a credible plan to take to the wto ministerial as a basis for completing the doha development round and if we can't get a deal involving everyone we have to look at other ways in which to drive forward with the trade liberalization that our world needs, ensuring the continued

work of the wto, preventing any collapse back into protectionism which would be disastrous, but go fors,haith the ition willire aheaith meitiouslsnd joinater thooser, an us setnmpleo t rld, by concliny nex yeart comprehensive economic and trade agreent ben eund canada which will deliver a huge boast to jobs growth on both sid. (applause) mr. speak let me conclude byaying thi th relationship between britain and canada is deep and strong. 54 with the second world war i still in mind winston churchill

put it like this. we have melted all pearls and endured all the agonies of the past. we shall provide aga and thus preil over thegers and the problems of the future. withhold norifi, grudge no toil,eek no sordid game, fear no foe. so let us in this new century look to the future, secure in our joint values and seeking new opportunities, we are two nations but under one queen and united by oneet of values, so let us fear n foe, as we work together for a safer and betr world. thank you. (app

(applause) >> in a few moments the debate on the bill to keep the government funded into november. then "washington journal" is live at 7:00 eastern with segments on the solar power industry and employment trends. top executives of the bankrupt

solar panel manufacturing company are scheduled to testify before the house energy subcommittee. >> the house approved temporary

spending. it includes $3.6 billion for disaster aid with offsets from spending cuts it a technology program for the auto industry and energy department loan program. harry reid says the house measure doesn't provide enough disaster relief so the senate will reject it. here is house debate from last night. time as i may consume. i rise tonight to bring to the floor the continuing appropriations resolution to keep the federal government operating until november 18, 2011. before you is a slightly amended version of the bill, which is necessary after last night's vote. i hope that my colleagues recognize the urgency of this situation and will join me in taking the responsible step and support this c.r. this bill must pass -- may we

have order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the house will be in order. the gentleman -- will members in the back of the chamber please take their conversations to the cloakroom. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: this bill must pass if we are going to keep our word to the american people. we need to get help to americans who need it most, those who lost their homes and businesses to the unforgiving natural disasters. fema is rapidly burning through its emergency funding and its ability to help those people recover from tornadoes, earthquakes, and wildfires. right now, at this minute, fema had $200 million left in the coffer and spending at the rate of $30 million a day for

disaster relief. at this rate, they will be out of money over the weekend. this infusion of funding, $1 billion in emergency fiscal year 2011 disaster funding and $2.65 billion for fiscal 2012 is critical. i can't stress that enough. and it will go far to relieve the burdens of those who are in need tonight. this version of the bill creates an additional offset to the fiscal 2011 fiscal funding and the offset from the vehicle loan program, we are rescinding $111 million from the innovative loan guarantee program a section of the failed stimulus act that funded solyndra.

the c.r. continues government operations at a rate of $1 ,043,000,00 and it's on the law books of the country. this reduced responsible rate will help restore our nation's fiscal health. it's vital that congress pass this legislation as swiftly as possible. we must prevent a government shutdown and we have to replenish exhausted disaster recovery funds, which will dry up over the weekend. and just as importantly, we need time to complete work on the fiscal year 2012 appropriations legislation so we can avoid the uncertainty and instability that we saw last year when it took us until april to complete full year appropriations'

legislation. i urge my colleagues to vote for this bill, not only to keep the government running and help hundreds of thousands of americans relying on us to help them get back on their feet all across the country. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the house will be in order. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: mr. speaker, i yield myself as much time as i may consume. mr. speaker, i know as well as anyone that members change their minds. i have heard a lot about that the last couple of days, but here we are debating essentially the same bill that we voted on yesterday. many republicans who voted no last night did so because they believed $1.043 trillion is too much spending. the bill spends $1.043 trillion. i will be the first to say every

member is to change his or her mind. however, i'm eager to hear my republican colleagues who voted no yesterday answer why it is ok to vote yes today. and i hope these members will not hang their hat on the one if anything leaf of change in the bill. the bill insludes recision in emergency funding from section from the d.o.e. loan program, recision of emergency funds does not score as a reduction from the $1.043 trillion. democrats voted no. we strongly oppose taking funding from the advanced technology vehicle manufacturing program. this is a program that has proven to be a success in creating new jobs, and such a success that the national association of manufacturers and the chamber of commerce of the

united states have both called upon the congress to not cut out this program because one, it's -- the money is repaid and it is creating jobs, something the majority has not done in the months that they have been in the majority. this is a jobs program. we strongly oppose the notion at efforts to help americans rebuild their lives after floods, hurricanes, wildfires and other natural disasters should be put on hold until congress can agree on offsets in reduction in spending. we will continue to vote no because it requires an offset to provide disaster relief funding and that offset is misguided. they take $1.5 billion from the advanced technology vehicle program at the department of energy ty