our guest has been at the 10 general richard mills -- has been a lieutenant general richard mills, joining us for from the u.s. marine corps museum. thanks for starting military week with us. guest: thank you for the opportunity, and for all the marines listening, happy birthday, marines. host: we will be back with another edition of "washington journal" tomorrow. we will continue military week, looking at the air force and the drone program. thursday, the coast guard official friday, the demographics of the armed forces. here is the u.s. house pro forma session. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] the clerk: the speaker's room,

washington, d.c., november 7, 2011. i hereby appoint the honorable fred upton to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, reverend dr. alenkeran, office of the senate chaplain, here in washington. the chaplain: let us pray. lord god almighty, author of life and creator of the universe, we come today seeking your divine wisdom, peace and protection. in these complex times, please grant our leaders the knowledge and insights needed to solve the economic and international challenges facing our nation and world. anoint our leaders with your spirit and grant them your favor. as they labor for liberty, fill them with the peace that passes all understanding. may their bodies, minds and

spirits continue to thrive as they make critical decisions about our country's future. father, we also pray for your divine protection, for you are not naive in thinking that all will always be well but in tough times we are sure that you, king of heaven's armies, will be watching over us and guiding us. lord, be with those in harm's way and their families. we pray in the mighty name that is above all names. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the chair will lead the house in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

without objection, the house stands adjourned until 2:30 p.m. on thursday next. prime minister cameron will take questions from parliament members, alive and about half an hour on c-span.

madeleine albright leads a discussion on the arab spring and the transition and number of countries are in after the many leadership changes. activists from libya, yemen, and bahrain will this past. aboutws' chief talks covering foreign conflicts. it is part of the series with former cbs and nbc news correspondent. >> almost every to a lot country, you pay tax. the nine states taxes or global and, but an essential, bing taxed twice for the same income. three anti competitive. it forces them to leave their money overseas. >> consumer electronics association head gary shapiro and recommendations from its members. >> when we need some economic stimulus, we can have this money comeback into the economy at a

lower tax rate and even tied to jobs for capital investment. >> "the communicator's" on c- span-2. >> president obama will deliver remarks on executive actions to help veterans get back to work. he will deal with tax credits and the american jobs acrid live coverage from the rose garden at noon eastern. looking at the republican presidential primary and how it is shaping up in the early primary states. >> at the table, national political reporter for the atlantic. pieces. "religious right still lacking >> when you think about the evangelical party, such a key

part of that base. base. recall how important they work? this time around, there is not a candidate that they feel that they can rally around. in a lot of ways, they are frustrated, dissatisfied. they do not like the tone of the discussion around immigration. the leaders of the christian right are still not sure what they're going to do. host: what might they do in the year ahead? do they come out? coalesce? of what do you see happening? guest: this particular leader that i spoke to, richard lamm, insists that they will come out and be motivated, because they are -- because they want so badly to defeat president obama. but that negative motivation is different from a positive motivation of having someone that you actually want to vote

for. the question is -- will they come out or stay home? before they became politicized and activated in the 1990's, with the christian coalition, there was a strong feeling that maybe they should not be involved in politics. that may be their religious sphere was not the sphere of government. they may retreat back into the private sphere. host: the phone numbers are on the bottom of the screen for our guests. molly ball, a national political reporter for "the atlanta," here to take your calls on politics. there is this headline as well, molly ball. there is a new poll that shows mitt romney is electable, but that many republicans are still hesitant. more hesitancy in the party.

they are saying that he has a significant advantage over the rivals except in that one area, collectability. what does that mean? guest: i find this very interesting on the campaign trail. activists, the electability means something different to them than it does to the pundits. there is a feeling that mitt romney is the most electable candidate. he matches well against president obama, but many republicans and do not feel that way. they want a champion who is as angry as they are about the situation in america, about president obama. in someone like mitt romney, they see someone who is too much like obama to be elected. host: according to this poll,

the best chance to be obama, mitt romney has 33%, herman cain has 21%. you can read more at "the washington post." a little bit more story. herman cain was all the rage in the news last week, continues to be headed into this week. "the new york daily news," has this, "slip showing, sexual harassment scandal." they write that it is great -- cutting into his popularity. another one says, in "usa today," that he has raised $2 million amidst this uproar. guest: i am not sure of that particular poll is reliable. i believe that it is an online poll. but i think we need to look at

more polling to see if there is a trend in his support. but there was a knee-jerk reaction amongst supporters to rally around him and take his side against what they saw as a hit on him by the liberal media. also, it is important to add that we do not know if that fund raising is real or not. the claim from his campaign is that we have no way of checking on the exposure to find out how much money these candidates are raising. host: also in the post, in the obama tenure, a resurgent wall street thriving under the president. what might that kind of headline mean to the gop field in the broader race? of guest: on the one hand, the financial industry does not seem particularly grateful for what

has happened to them under the broader administration. certainly, they turned against him in terms of the general sentiment of a lot of the donations. i think we are going to see wall street being the big villain in this coming election. we are going to see democrats working to associate the republican nominee with wall street, whether it is mitt romney with his past in the financial industry, or really any other republican candidate that is the line of attack. the extent to which obama distances himself from wall street, it hurts him in some ways in terms of fund-raising and his friendliness with the establishment, it might be a good thing for him in terms of being elected. host: first guest, virginia, good morning. thank you for waiting. caller: good morning [no audio]

our god given freedom, our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as america should be, not as aggressive as want it to be. progressives are worse than liberals. they want to tax and spend you into oblivion. thank you. god help america. host: a strong voice. guest: that is one view that we have heard a lot of. a very strong anger in a lot of votes moving against obama. host: an interesting piece, "christian politics makes unholy alliances." about a professor in -- written

by a professor in georgia. guest: farewell, i would guess that i would say to the writer, good luck with that. politicians talk about these things because they work. you can decry it as a way to manipulate people or a play on tribalism, but politicians will seek advantages wherever they can find them.

host: florida, independent line, good morning. caller: what do you mean when you say christians? the only presidential candidate that i see with religion is what we all want. not just questions, we all want that, in obama. i do not see obama doing anything wrong. the united states was messed up when he got in there and i think we're better than we were then. why not keep him in there doing that job? guest: it is important to remember that the religious right, which consists mostly of evangelical christians, particularly older evangelical christians, is a distinct part of what we could call the overall christian vote. people that identify themselves particularly as born-again christians, not all types of

questions, although many catholics are also in that very conservative bloc. there is a younger generation of evangelicals and many of them are more liberal than that older cohort, caring more about environmental issues, helping the port. -- poor. obama mobilized many of those voters in 2008. in the past they have remained aggressively secular. he did have some success with those voters. i think that we will see that the evangelical vote less monolithic as time wears on. host: adding abortion to all of this, "the wall street journal," brings this back up as a headline.

host: first, there is a new dnc advertisement out regarding mitt romney and abortion. here's a look. >> under the constitutional amendment would you establish life as the moment of conception? >> voters will vote for a candidate in a key position and specific issues. one issue that has become controversial, the personhood amendment. >> i could have died because of

my ectopic pregnancy. with him in place, i would have died. >> absolutely. host: the gop and abortion? guest: this will be taken up tomorrow, the declaration of a fertilized human egg to be a person with all of the rights that a human has. this is something that will probably pass and has a lot of consequences that we do not understand, even with an anti- abortion activist communities there is a division over this kind of approach, with some groups thinking that may actually backfire. it is definitely going to be litigated. when it goes to the supreme court, there is a fear that they will lose and it will set back because of trying to outlaw abortion. host: may, good morning. guest: good morning.

-- caller: good morning. why do you think that the christians so badly want to beat the president? he has done more for this country than any other president. i do not understand that very well. i want to see what your answer is. thank you very much. host: something that you want to tackle, molly ball? guest: an interesting question. there has been a long history of very religious people being associated with the republican party and the right. not only on issues like these very divisive social issues, abortion and gay marriage, but also on economic issues. i think you would have to do some real parsing of historical trends to sort that out. that is something where, as you mentioned, even in an election that is focused almost entirely

on the economy, these things almost always come out. candidates are always called to account for where they stand on these issues. particularly when they go to iowa. there are activists that demand to know where the candidates stand on these divisive social issues. even in an election that is supposed to be about other things, we find ourselves talking about this over and over again. these are emotional issues that always turn into hot buttons. host: troy, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. the young christians, without exception, young christians are going to go for ron paul in this next election. she is right about different issues being important to us. like the environment. we are concerned about the gsa growing. camp trails over every state.

-- chemtrails over every state. that is why from paul is our candidate. host: what do you think? guest: ron paul has been trying to aggressively court the christian vote in this election in a way that he did not do four years ago. his campaign has run advertisements talking about him being pro-life. seeking to position himself as being more in tune with the social issues rather than emphasizing familiar hobbyhorses that we hear from him all over again, like hard money and the fed. we are still seeing that, despite the money he has in this campaign and despite his more professional operation, he has a hard ceiling where he pulls better than other candidates but is not able to break into that top tier, where he is actually

giving romney a run for his money. someone like herman cain has a more conventional set of issues. host: mitt romney, rick perry, here is an ad from the former massachusetts governor. ♪ host: there is that immigration issue, coming up again. guest: it will become a point of contention between the parry and romani. but perry, despite the way he

has fallen off the map, is still the one that mitt romney is attacking, not herman cain, who actually competes with them in terms of numbers. because rick perry seems to have the money and professional operation to have staying power if he can come back with voters. also because his only hope is to be the conservative alternative to mitt romney and immigration is the one issue is where mitt romney is to the right of rick perry, so he is seeking to paint creek perry as too liberal. host: john, independent. caller: the country keeps talking about jobs, jobs, jobs. jobs are not coming back to this country. you and i both know that. unless the people in this country started working for $4 an hour. there is no reason for big corporations to big jobs -- bring jobs back to this country when they can go to libya,

china, indonesia, mexico, and pay labour whatever it is -- $1 per day, 50 cents an hour. there are no jobs left in this country. topiclet's stick to the at hand. caller: obama is correct, this is class warfare. people are saying that he is wrong. it is class warfare because everything is slanted toward the rich and corporations. people have forgotten that eight years under the bush administration, they collapse of the economy. obama took over with a collapsed economy under unprecedented conditions. eight years under the bush administration, he gave big corporations their own way. the result was a collapsed economy. host: the collapsed warfare argument came most recently from the speaker yesterday during one

of the sunday shows. that idea of class warfare, a plug that into the race at this point. guest: recall that he explicitly said that this is not class warfare. democrats are accustomed to this attack on them and are trying to turn it around. a familiar refrain every time that something is introduced. particularly taxes on the rich. we see in polls that there is generally overwhelming support for requiring the rich to pay more taxes. but, republicans have had a lot of success in turning that around. including class warfare that it's essentially on the american feeling that we are not the kind of society where these classes war against each other. we are not europe. we will see. i think that the caller hit on

the key issue for the president. can he convince people that he is going in the right direction with the economy and that is not his fault? we have seen a lot less invoking of the bush administration as they realize that even if people still blame bush for the state of things, they are tired of having that brought up and they want discussions on progress. back to rick perry. here's a look at his advertisement. >> if you want a slick person with advertising skills, we already have that. he has destroyed the economy. i am a do'er, not a talker. we cut a record $15 billion from the state budget. they say that we cannot do that in washington. they are wrong. they need to go. i am a carry and i approve this message.

-- i am rick perry and i approve this message. host: what does he have to do to get his numbers up? guest: show that he can be as convincing in purpose -- in person as he is on camera. we have seen very erratic performances from him when he comes on live. when he is on screen like that, he can be exciting, energetic, and convincing. but in other settings, like that strange speech that he gave in new hampshire, he just is not on all of the time. even if voters are not looking for what he calls a slick talker, they want someone with a know who he is an to can perform, to some extent, and be convincing. host: one last call from jerry, democratic line. huntington beach, california.

caller: thank you. the republican party seems to have a tendency to nominate weak candidates, like bob dole and john mccain, as well as others. i think that they will do it again this time. the only one that i would consider voting for would be ron paul. but we will not get a chance to vote for him. host: what are you looking for this week? guest: this is a point in the primary where you have a sense of despair in the field. this is true for both parties. no one looks good. everyone is afraid that they are picking up everything. host: we are joined by molly

>> see more videos. linked to the media partners in the early primary and caucus states. iowa, new hampshire, and south carolina all at c-span.org/2012. coming up at 5:00, coverage of former secretary of state madeleine albright leading a discussion on the arab spring and the transition in number of arab countries and after the many british of changes. activists from libya, yemen, and bahrain will be at the discussion. at 8:00, cbs news' chief correspondent will be talking about covering foreign conflicts. the former cbs and nbc nbcmarvin kelp. >> extremism in defense of

liberty is no vice. let me remind you also, moderation and the pursuit of justice is no virtue. >> he lost the 1964 presidential election to lyndon johnson, but barry goldwater's ideas and candor. he is featured this week on "the contenders." live friday at 8:00 p.m. eastern. in a moment, we will go live to the british house off commons or prime minister david cameron will be reporting to members on last week's g-20 summit in france. at the conclusion of the meeting, the leaders' summit major economies pledged to boost the international monetary fund to help eurozone countries like greece and italy.

prime minister will take questions from the opposition and from members of the house of commons. this is expected to last about an hour. >> to help the police and local authorities deal with this particular problem. >> as not hon. friend has identified, these are local issues. what i can say to him is there has been in consultation and speeding up the eviction of anti-social tenants. the consultation closes today. if you have the right of the tenancy, that brings responsible is with the and we will be reflecting on that consultation once the response. >> mechanisms, if any, to ensure representative given the opportunity to express a concern about problems with the functions performed by the agency. >> i can assure the hon. later we are always willing to hear

from members of staff about any concerns they have in any proposals that have. i was in turkey only a matter of days ago listening to those who were operating these decisions at the embassy there and hearing directly from them of the concerns that have any ideas that to make things better. >> thank you, mr. speaker. falling a legal and kamen and 13 caravans -- in canada over the weekend, police have said they have refused to be the the agency in removing this trespassers. they are following apco guidelines. >> my hon. friend raises the important issue. i first commend the actions they took in relation to -- and the

operation they did there. we are looking at whether or not we need to give extra power to the police in relation to the clearing of the encampments another such incursions. it is the case landowner has to take legal action in assuming the incursion is not stopping the normal life of committee. if it is, the police have some say. >> thank you, mr. speaker. with permission, i would like to make a statement on last week's g-20 summit. there were three key aspects to this summit. first, agreement on an action plan for growth and jobs. specific countries agreed to do specific things in order to maximize overall growth in the world's economy. second, the g-20 continued with its work to identify and remove some of the key obstacles to

growth. imbalances between surplus and deficit, improving global governance, and protecting the world's poorest from the current economic problems. third, there was the main issue of instability in the eurozone. first, the action plan for growth and jobs but it includes many things britain is already doing from fiscal consolidation and monetary action to removing the barriers in the wake of business and job creation. the g-20 recognized yet again the importance of implementing "clear, credible, and specific measures." it is clearly identified a group of countries to have the space to borrow for additional discretionary measures. i have to tell any members of the house who want to see the u.k. borrow more, no one was proposing u.k. should be in this group of countries. [laughter] with ourermined to do debt. and the need to press on with our plan for consolidation has been recognized by the g-20 as

well as the imf o and theecd. the imbalances which did so much damage in the run-up to 2008 are growing again. this matters because it's clear to maximize global growth and avoid some of the spigot of baubles of the past, countries with a trade surplus need to increase the best in sure they keep their markets open. those with the trade deficit have to understand -- undertake structural form to improve competitiveness. russia is making changes to its foreign exchange regime. china agreed to increase its exchange rate flexibility. both are reflected in the communique could more needs to be done. the greatest mistake the global economy could do is a slide toward protectionism. the report sets out of the protectionist measures that have been taken in g-20 countries over the last year. these are a cause for concern. the g-20 reaffirmed its pledge not to take protectionist action, committed to roll back

any protectionist measures that may have arisen, and reaffirmed his determination to refrain from competitive devaluation of currency. we welcome that russia is set to become a member of the wto by the end of the year. i have said it is time to working with groups of to drivee deals. together with five other g-20 leaders, i wrote to president sarkozy ahead of the summit to call for new approaches to trade liberalization. that was agreed. on improving global governance, i presented the report i am replacing -- i am placing library today which secured a group of the key proposals. the g-20 should continue as a flexible gathering rather than a reordering. what is the it is not new institutions but political will. we should make the now establish financial stability board a

separate legal body to give it the authority and ability that it needs. worshippers -- which should strengthen the wto's role. further progress was made on cracking down on tax havens, tax evasion, and a proper regulatory system for banks to make up for the woeful system that existed in summit countries including hours over the last decade. on development, bill gates cover presentation suggesting was a mobilizing resources to help the world's poorest. it included helping some developing countries help themselves through proper systems for collecting taxes and transparent ravenous for natural resources. he gave strong support to the uk's on record on the development agenda. on the financial transactions tax, we are not opposed in principle to such a tax if one can be agreed of the global level. but we will not unilaterally introduce a new financial transaction tax in the u.k. neither will we support the introduction in the european

union unless it is part of a global move. britain has introduced a bank levee and we are meeting our global agreement on overseas aid. if other countries want to introduce new financial taxes at home including to raise revenue for development, that is for them to decide. what they should not do is try to hide behind proposals for an eu tax as an excuse or political inaction and meeting targets whether that is for spending on developments or climate change. mr. speaker, the current proposals for financial transactions tax in europe are so deeply confused the different european countries and institutions have talked about spending and revenues of such a tax in five different ways. development, climate change, social policy, resolving the banking crisis, and the best way to supplement the eu budget. i would say that would be a stretch, even for robin hood. [laughter] let me turn to the problems in

eurozone. it is clearly in our national interest for the eurozone to sort out its problems. the biggest single boost to the british economy this autumn of the lasting resolution to the eurozone crisis. that is why britain has been pressing to act not just at the g-20, but for many months. the deal and brussels 10 days ago was welcome progress. it reflected the three essential elements of britain has been calling for. first, reinforcing the bailout fund by eurozone countries to create a proper fire wall against contagion. second, recapitalization of weak european banks. third, a decisive resolution to the unsustainable position of greece paused debt. the euro area countries need to to implemen the agreement urgently. the rest of the world can play a supporting role. in the end, the work has to be done by the eurozone countries themselves. no one else can do it for them.

britain will not contribute to the eurozone bailout fund whether that is the efsf or special purpose vehicle. while the imf may administer funds, it will not contribute to it. the imf does have a vital role to play in supporting countries but across the world that are in serious economic distress. 53 countries currently being supported by the imf of which only three, greece, ireland, and portugal, are in the eurozone. it is essential that the imf have the resources that it needs. at the g-20, britain, the u.s., china, and all the other countries around the table made clear we are willing in principle to see an increase in imf resources to boost global confidence. there is agreement about the timing, extent, or exact method for this to be done. britain stands ready to contribute the limits agreed by this house. those who propose we walk away

from the imf or who even oppose the increase in imf resources agreed by the last government, are not acting responsibly or in the best interests of britain. it is in our national interest that countries across the world that are in distress are supported in their efforts to recover. the collapse of our trading partners, whether in the eurozone or not, would have a serious impact on our economy. businesses would not invest. jobs will be lost. families would be poorer. through the imf, we can help other countries in a way that does not affect our own public finances. it is for the eurozone and the ecb, european central bank, to support the euro. global action cannot be a substitute for concrete action by the eurozone. the g-20 withheld specific imf commitment at this stage precisely because he wanted to see more concrete action from eurozone countries to make the fire wall credible and stand behind their currency. the world sent a clear message

to eurozone at this summit -- sort yourselves out and then we will help, not the other way around. mr. speaker, these are difficult times for the global economy. the government is focused on one objective -- help britain weather the storm and safeguard our economy. because of the tough situations with taken to get to grips with deficit, britain has awarded the -- avoided the worst at this stage of the global debt crisis. in 2008, u.k. bond yields were about the same as those increase. today, although we of the second highest deficit in the eu behind ireland, are bond yields are almost the same as in germany and around the lowest they have been since world war ii. this is because we have a credible plan to deal with our debt and a resolve to see it through. the situation in italy further emphasizes the need for a credible plan to deal with debt. the eurozone must do what is necessary and see through the

agreement reached in brussels 10 days ago. britain and all are g-20 partners will continue to press for this to happen. i commend this statement to the house. >> mr. speaker, can ithank the prime minister? i have to say, what a complete in a statement from and out of touch, nestor. anybody listening to him would think the g-20 summit had been a great success, but it was not, mr. speaker. a me ask him about the three areas where the summit should have made progress. the eurozone, reforming our banking system, and economic growth. on the eurozone, the chancellor in its september, the resin has six weeks to resolve this political crisis. the six weeks is up. mr. speaker, there is no clear solution on financing. how much, from whom, and what

circumstances. none of those questions are being answered. the crisis in greece is spreading to italy and no plan for jobs and growth, just more austerity. can the prime minister tell us, why european and g-20 leaders failed to get this solution on the eurozone customer the chancellor told us from france he in the prime minister word " right at the heart of the discussion." progress that was made in the summit, and always with his prime minister, failure has nothing to do with him. [laughter] mr. speaker, does he not regret he did not try harder and earlier to engage in the discussion and push for an agreement rather than standing aside income in britain was a safe haven? mr. speaker, can he say what responsibility he takes for the failure on ?

given the importance this has for britain, can he tell us specifically what he plans to do in the coming days to get an agreement? let me turn to the funding for the imf. the prime minister said on friday and again today, you cannot ask the imf or other countries to substitute for action that needs to be taken within the eurozone itself. we agree with that. it should not be done to make up for inadequate eurozone actions. the prime minister has said he would not support the direct use of imf resources to top off the europeans financial stability fund. but can he categorically ruled out imf resources being used in directly and parallel to make up for insufficient funding from the efsf? can he square his position with the commitment to the imf

within agreed resources with the comments of the managing director of the imf that there's no cap, no ceiling on imf resources? let me turn to banking reform, specifically the global financial transaction act which we support and believed to be implemented if we can reach agreement and all the major financial centers. it was on the agenda in france, but no real progress was made but i have to say, i cannot tell from his statement was the prime minister supporting it and not opposed in principle, hardly a ringing endorsement mr. speaker, i do not think we should be surprised if it a week before the summit negotiations even started, the chancellor was running the business leaders, casting doubt on whether any such mechanism and a sufficient way to raise revenue. can the prime minister tell us if he argued for a global financial transaction tax at the summit? can he tell us what steps he will be taking in the weeks and months ahead to advance his

cause? let me turn to growth. the first paragraph of the communique says "since our last meeting, global recovery has weakened particularly in advanced countries living unemployment and unacceptable levels." that is certainly true in this country, mr. speaker, where growth has flat line and unemployment is at a 17-year high. does the prime minister understand why people are so disappointed by the failure of this summit? the prime minister talks about trade and imbalances. mr. speaker, action on trade imbalances will take years to the employment. he also mentioned undertaking by various countries to take action. but it is an important point in the communique that these will only be implemented if "global economic conditions materially worsen."

people around the country will be wondering, how much worse does it need to get? he says, by the way, nobody is arguing for britain to take a course but the imf last month said if the british community under shoots, the chancellor should continue. the prime minister said after the april 20,009 g-20 summit, the glens and glamour of this week must keep remote to the small businessman who still trying to secure credit or a mother worrying if she can keep a roof over her children's heads. mr. speaker, the 2009 g-20 summit succeeded and this one failed. for the young person unemployed, for the business with goods disappearing, for people leaving the high street, this summit achieved precisely nothing. that is why the prime minister looks so out of touch when he climbs the some admitted

difference on growth. but isn't the real problem is, the prime minister does not really believe we need a global plan? he used to cram the austerity is an home. people wanted action from the summit and they did not get it. -- people. this is a to nothing summit from deeply complacent prime minister out of touch with the real needs of our economy. >> i do not know who writes his rubbish. i like 20 quoted my response from the 2009 summit. if the 2009 summit was such a success, why did the labor party

vote against one of its key conclusions in the house of commons to increase imf resources? he talks about regulating banks with no recognition of the field regulatory system that he oversaw for a decade. he talks about the eurozone with no recognition that they had a national changeover plan to get the whole of britain to adopt the euro. mr. speaker, above all, let us be clear if we listen to his advice, we would not have been in france talking about a greek bailout, but at the imf discussing a british bailout. let me remind him of those figures. in 2008, greek bond yields and british bond yields for both 4.5%. in the u.k. since then, they have halved. in greece, they are up six times. that is because they did not have a credible policy for

deficit-reduction and we do. mr. speaker, let me come back to the issue of the imf. what we're seeing is breathtakingly irresponsible. about theirar position on the imf and remember this is an organization founded by britain where we are a leading shareholder, rescued us from labor in the 1970's, and their position is first to vote against the increase in resources agreed by the g-20 under their own government. they called it a triumph at the time, yet trip to the division office and a complete display of opportunism. it gets worse. now they are saying they do not want imf resources for any eurozone country are they saying they want to take money off ireland, off portugal? they would have turned up at the summit where every country was talking about increasing imf

resources, and would have said on no account would britain support that he meant how ridiculous. they are saying to eurozone countries who contribute to the imf, you're never allowed to seek its assistance. i thought if they meant this, i would take it seriously. this is all about politics. they are putting the politics ahead of the economics. we know that is the case with the chancellor. he only thinks about the politics. the question for the liver of the labor party, are you a better politician than that? i am afraid the answer is no. >> did chancellor merkel to my hon. friend wants the european central bank is not fully discharging its duties -- its duty as the euro's lender of last resort not providing

massive quantitative easing, not moving toward near zero interest rates, not urging president sarkozy to read nationalize the leading french banks before the credit crunch closes on france? because chancellor merkel knows very well bid was ninth inflation, but high unemployment dollar-it was not inflation, but high unemployment. >> my friend speaks powerfully about this issue. he is right we must not allow or permit the imf to substitute for what the european central bank and the other institution of the european union need to do. that is vital. that was one of the reasons why in the end, all the countries of the world that were prepared to

see an increase in imf resources wanted to see more done by the eurozone and the ecb. i have discussed this with the chancellor. the huge hole back there is in germany about what the central bank is and what it should do. i believe as it says in the communique, you've got to have the institutions of the eurozone fully behind the currency in order to save it. >> understandably the prime minister is putting on a brave face of what happens last week. with regard to growth, with regard to the prison crisis which is as bad now as it was a few days ago. icn on reports the g-20 is planning to meet again perhaps as early as the remaining part of this year or the beginning of next year. is that right? with the prime minister be reminded no summit is better than a failure of the g-20 may

be not perfect, but cannot afford another meeting where a singularly fails to come up with the answer. >> i think he is right could meetings that do not have a proper conclusion cannot add to the problem rather than solve the problem read what is required is the political will for eurozone countries to act. i was very clear after the g-20 meeting, it had not achieved a breakthrough on the euro. some progress has been made in terms of establishing the three elements that need to be put in place. but much more has to be done. there may well may be a meeting of g-20 finance ministers. i agree, it is progress and his resolution of these issues that is required, rather than another meeting. >> given the intense interest in the same on the fact or to further statements to follow,-- >> implementation of the

financial transaction tax would reduce gdp in the euro area of 1.8% of gdp. this would hit the u.k. disproportionately hard at a time when we need more growth, not less. does he not agree of all times now is not the proper moment to consider such a controversial measure? >> i think it is important for people to see the european report on the transaction tax which shows the figures he talks about, that it would cost jobs. if you can achieve global agreement for a tax of this nature, there would be a case for it. it is very hard to see that happening. i think of focus on politicians in europe should meet the promises that are made about development rather than hide behind a financial transaction tax they know is very unlikely to come into being. >> can i say to the prime minister the frustration and impatience expressed on thursday and friday last it was extremely

well merited and would be as well he came here and repeated the concern he had about the failure of leadership across europe at this final time a bank isn't a tragedy in that context when europe needs a voice for reform, for example, on budgetary policy, he has dealt himself on of the game with the focus on the repatriation of powers which frankly is not the issue, to make or break the economy? >> i do not agree with the gentleman on that issue for this reason. i have managed to assemble a coalition for budgetary restraint in the european union. this year, britain, france, germany and others have all agreed to freeze the eu budget. i would like to go further proof a freeze in the budget in real terms is not something we have been able to achieve in recent years. i do not accept looking at rebalancing powers in europe and fighting for a deal on the budget you can do both. >> given the fact single markets

including the city of london, a majority vote, how does the prime minister proposing to achieve a majority to protect our interests in the context of the fiscal union he is advocating? >> first of all, you need to disconnect the two issues for a first of all, the issue of the single market and the threat to the city of london and to britain's financial-services is a real threat. we have to work extremely hard to build alliances in the single market, in the european council, the stock directives that are going to damage. it is one of the areas to want to make sure we can better safeguard in the future. i do not support a fiscal union in that i do not think britain should join in fiscal union. when you have a single currency that is frankly quite dysfunctional, one of the ways

it could be made more functional is for a greater fiscal union. that is just a statement of fact rather than saying we wanted in new way to join in. we do not. we want to safeguard the interests of britain by making sure the single market works for us. >> is it really in the best long-term interest of this country for the government to consistently present the united kingdom as the neighbor from hell in regard to the european union? the issues the european union wish to spend money on are the issues which his constituents and my citizens around the world wish to see spent on will he change his mind on this issue? >> the fact is, this government and the government she has supported has made and kept promises about things our constituents care about my development, like climate

change. in terms of being a good neighbor, i have to say, one of the most and they're really ask you can take is when the whole world is looking at -- the un neighborly is to walk away and vote against it. summer public ashamed of, not only a good neighbor, but on a northern planet. >> -- but on another planet pretty >>, economist to tell me what -- offering subsidized loans to head off the crisis in the market? >> because i to the question the father of the house ask which is about the actions of the ecb. the ecb has been intervening and markets and of borrowing bonds of countries that are under pressure. that is what makes this a

difficult to understand why some in europe are so opposed to the ecb and more of a monetary activist, if i could put it that way. everyone to be careful about speculating about another country. but italy has got to demonstrate it has a credible fiscal path. it is not about the confidence of the markets said it will be a to pay its deficit, pay its debt. if it can do it, its interest rates will fall. >> exit from the arizona is clearly in view. -- an exit from the eurozone is clearly in the print until the states can retrieve their own national currencies find appropriate characters, they will not recover? >> >> it is an issue the greeks have to decide themselves. they have been offered a deal which can write down their debt

and state and a single currency. their decision to take that road or take another road for the only thing i would say to members of the house who are deeply skeptical about a single currency of which i am one is that which should be very careful and recognizing that country's leading a single currency can cause all sorts of defects and problems for other economies including our on. we should not see this as some sort of painless, easy option for a country to fall out of the euro. it would have very real consequences for other countries including our own. >> mr. simon hughes. >> given the role of big banks played triggering the present financial crisis, can the prime minister tell us what progress he made with the countries in the g-20 to follow example set by the proposal we recommended to break up the bank that is too big to fail so no economy or the big financial institutions can hold a gun to the state and the taxpayer?

>> obviously, many people will comment on the ultimate failure of the g-20 to resolve the crisis but the g-20 has made good steps forward in areas like trying to roll back protectionism and on the issue about globally significant financial institutions and the impact they can have and the recommendhe vicar's is totally in thune. >> does the prime minister realize that the british people listening to this that this british prime minister is suggesting a growth plan for italy, spain, and portugal well here at home, he sticks rigidly to high inflation and massive unemployment. ? >> that probably sounded better and from the mayor then when he

got into the chamber. [laughter] >> would you agree that one of the single biggest filips would be breaking the deadlock over the doha agreement? would this make progress on this issue under the mexican presidency? >> thank you for that question. the point about doha is it is not progressing in the way it was meant to. there is a gridlock among the developing countries and countries like america that don't see enough. it seems to be the only way forward if we want to see more global trade deals that are good for all those participating is to have coalitions of the willing, countries that want to push ahead, and that as what -- is what has been sanctioned at the g20. >> greece, spain, and portugal

are already insolvent within the european monetary unit. none of these countries are likely to regain their competitiveness. do you think it would be better for the imf [unintelligible] >> you make an important point but it is not necessarily fair to lump all of this country's together. some of them like italy have huge budget deficits in terms of debt to gdp ratio. they have managed to compete within single currencies. i'm not sure you aware you group the country together is entirely fair. report role of the imf is not to support a currency system. it is not to support the euro zone. the imf has to be there for countries that are in distress. that is why everyone in this house supported the imf program

that went into ireland. a win in as a partner oof countries. -- it went in as a partner of countries. it would be extraordinary to say to euros on countries that you are shareholders but you cannot get money when you are in distress. that would be an extraordinary position but one that seems to have the support of the labor front bench. >> it has been a policy for 300 years to avoid financial conflict on the continent. the imf will have enormous powers over us and not have influence over their. >> we are suffering at the moment from a single currency that we are not a member of the spot that has some serious structural issues and faults. in our interests, those faults

are resolved. one way of helping to resolve those faults would be to for a greater cooling of fiscal among the people who are members. i never supported the single currency. i don't think we can stick with the status quo where we have a single currency but it is having a chilling effect on our economy and not seeking a resolution. >> a few years ago, the president of yemen was invited to the g-20. since then, it has the third highest malnutrition rate in the world. what additional help kenyon and be given as a result of the g-20 meeting. >> -- what additional help can yemen be given as a result of the g-20 meeting? >> we have not given any imf money yet. there was no agreement as to how much. the world stood ready to support the imf.

the imf has supported countries like yemen in the past. we put in development aid to yemen. the biggest challenge in yemen is lack of effective governance. what bill gates was talking about is that proper assistance for raising taxes and proper systems for transparency in government revenues and revenues in terms of extracting industries and in minerals. those are the keys to helping countries like yemen. >> back in july, the hon. member told the members of this house that we have an agreement of 20 billion imf obligations. we hear is closer to $40 billion per accou. ministers have an obligation to be absolutely straight as to what they plan to do with other people's money. >> let me be absolutely clear about this -- there are two sorts of money that the u.k. provides to the imf.

there is money through our quota, our shareholding, and money through loans and other arrangements for there have been three votes in the past three years all the elements of this imf money in this house. if it comes to extra support for the imf, we want to do that within realistic boundaries. >> aren't we really dealing with a sophisticated form of russian roulette? on the one hand, we are told by the prime minister that he does not think it is right for countries with in the urals and to have funding cut off from the imf but on the other hand, he says at this stage there would be no additional money for the imf. when will this stage be right for the additional imf money? >> there are 53 i-map programs around the world. only three of them are enduros are in effect in it euro is

done. the countries have to sort out the problems of the euro. they need that fire wall and europe has to provide it. they need that recapitalization. they need the demonstrable and clear right down and greet death. those are things they have responsibility for. we have responsibility as a shareholder to bulk up finances at the right moment. it is just very sensible economic policy. >> what advice have you received on failing to pay our imf conscriptions? >> you make a very good point. i am not entirely sure what would have happened if we turned up at the g-20 having voted down the g20 deal from london about increasing the imf resources. therefore, we would not have implemented one of the key findings of the last g-20 and would have turned up and said we are not prepared to see an

increase in our funding for anything else. britain would have been completely isolated and left out. the reason the opposition party talks about that is because it is all about the cost -- politics and not the economics. they know it. >> the prime minister said the u.k. would not fund the efsx. there are two new powers proposed for it to ensure newly issued sovereign debt and to spin out investment trusts to buy that desperate i don't think the prime minister's government believes that power will be enough. >> i think there are still real difficulties with the esfs or send out of the year as a meeting 10 days ago. since then, we have not seen

enough details about how exactly these funds would work, how they would be levered out because you need to have a bazooka to convince people you would not have to use it. that is what the euro zone needs to do and they have not yet completed that work. >> i now appeal to single short supplementary questions. dr. julian lewis -- >> why does the prime minister seemed to think the greeks will be anymore successful at staying in the euro then we were at trying to remain in the ers? >> one of the few advantages of the ern was that we could get out of it and one issue with the euro is that there is not a mechanism legally for leaving the euro. if a country wanted to leave the europe, it could. this is an issue for the greeks.

they have to decide if they accept the deal that is on the table and stay in the euro or do they take a different path. i have been making the point that they have to make up their minds for the rest of the world to move on. >> there is a discussion about the on countable power of the rating agencies to decide massive country's welfare. and in control of the banking system rather than battling down to it? >> there were concerns expressed about the role of the rating agencies and the way they are regulated. sometimes it comes from politicians who have had a particularly rough time with the ratings agency and it is important use organizations like fsb to make sure we get these answers are right. >> we must have contingency

plans. if the euros on principle. do you agree that parliament must be given an early opportunity to scrutinize the adequacy of these contingency plans? >> i think it is quite a difficult task. there is important work going on on contingency plans but the more we discuss and speculate about the nature of another country's currency and economy, the more we could be damaging their own interests. i think it may be difficult to air some of these issues in public. >> the imf currently gets 32.4 billion sdr, pounds to the euro zone to prop it up. how can you justify giving more british taxpayers' money to the imf when there are people starving in africa and people

cannot pay their heating bills in england. >> no country has ever lost money and lending it to the imf. the imf is a vital institution in a globalized world to support countries that get into deep economic distress. if we were to walk away and see trading partners weather in the euro zone or not collapse, that would mean british jobs lost. it might give you a five-second sound bite on the news to give you a political advantage but it would be completely useless. >> the matter of greece remaining in the tourism -- remaining in the euro zone is a great decision. will you take time to read the paper that point said that europe as a whole and the united kingdom, our economy will be growing faster in two years' time if the breaks up that if

we try to keep it going? >> i have seen reports and perhaps i will have time this evening to read it at greater leisure. you can look at the economic experts and what they say but there is quite a strong consensus that in a single currency zone, when you have very interrelated banks and businesses, that the consequences of the country falling out of that is very serious for all members concerned. if that happens, we will have contingency plans in place and manage them as best we can. i don't think anyone however sceptical they are about the euro should think there is an easy way for a country to lose. >> now that critz will have a new government that will ratify -- now that the greeks will have a new government to ratify the agreement and a group of 20 is informal, would it not be appropriate whether this agreement will allow them to get

together and put together a fire wall under the nicolas sarkozy presidency? >> it may be necessary for the g-20 finance ministers to meet again. that should only be the case if actually a new set of arrangements are being put in place. part of the problem we have in europe is often meetings are scheduled but without a proper amount of thought about what is going to be the outcome and what will be the achievement. that has been one thing that has caused a huge amount of market turbulence over recent months. >> the e.u productivity is falling at a faster rate since 2009. the only big economy to record an expansion per worker -- per worker is the u.k.. why do think the united kingdom can sustain a 5% interest rates?

>> in terms of actually getting a greater competitiveness across europe, this is the most important thing that europe could be doing right now, completing a single market, complete -- competing in the market in energy and services. the point you make about the bond market is vital. if you don't have credibility, you cannot borrow money at this rate edit you don't have credibility, interest rates go up and that would be the worst thing to hit your economy. >> the prime minister has argued to support the european union which is not a prefer this country. in order to bring stability to europe and the world. how many more failures will it take and how many more summits before he argues for what is really right for europe, for those countries to return to their original currencies? >> i have sympathy with your

points. they could go in that direction but if you talk to other european prime ministers or finance ministers or people in the countries, they don't want to leave the euro. they want to make the euro work. i think it is right that we are affected by what is happening in the europe zone. it is in our interest that they get back together and make that currency work. you could argue for the opposite but the fact is, that is what most european countries want and i think they will try to achieve. >> maybe the prime minister will remember september 16, 1992 when the united kingdom started our economic recovery why is the political elite of europe did not increase in other europe countries the same method to improve their economy while withdrawing from the euro and re-establishing their national currency?

>> i learned an important lesson which is never fixed your interest rates in a way like that that when you need a change in your economy without applying elsewhere. that is why i am so completely opposed to britain ever joining the european i could not be clearer about that. we've got to allow other countries to make their own choices. the choice of people in greece seems to be that they want to stay in the euro. i would not necessarily make that choice but that is the choice they seem to make and have to support them in the choice they make. >> mr. speaker, a new report came out that shows that 32,000 jobs in the public sector were lost in the northeast last year while the number of private- sector jobs went down as well.

why should they? in in the euro destroy the regions of this country? >> of course, there has to be a rebalancing in our economy in terms of public sector jobs and private sector jobs. there are difficult circumstances faced by different parts of the country. in the northeast, we have seen the expansion and we have the new train going into the northeast. we need to become more competitive to start manufacturing and making things again which would benefit all regions of our country. >> wouldn't countries like france do more to help developing countries if france met its own u.n. target for international relations rather than absorbing the un targets to sign up for a financial

transaction tactics? >> some other countries in europe are using the cover of a financial transaction tax to get away from the fact they have not met their target for overseas development assistance. all the figures about the financial transactions, 80% of it would be raised from businesses in the united kingdom. i'm sometimes tempted to ask the french if they want a cheese tax. [laughter] >> the european central bank is been told to sit on its hands by the germans. it was the marshall plan [unintelligible] >> the european central bank is independent. no one is able to tell it what to do. obviously, i think there is a very strong case for euros and

institutions that need to do more to stand behind the currency. we have to understand why it is the germans feel as strongly as they do. it is partly based upon the history and what they feel went wrong in the 1920's and 1930's. the argument that the ecb and institutions need to make is right. >> do you agree that if we were to listen to the party opposite ease up but our deficit reduction strategy, our interest rates would soar toward levels of its elite? italy? what is that likely to cost and increase to payments? >> it is not just the extra interest payments that the government would have to pay although that would be pretty kraepelin, it you would see those higher interest rates affect business investments and affect the mortgages that people

pay. you could see a bad effect on households and businesses as well as on the government finance, tiberi of >too. >> when will we produce a jobs for plan and growth? >> it is worth while and why the g20 process is worthwhile is different countries are committed to do different things at the same time to maximize global growth. it is clear that britain needs to get on top of its debt and deficit and export more. it is also clear that china needs to grow its consumption and grow its middle-class and import more. it would do these things at the same time, we can maximize global growth and increase employment levels, too. >> i agree that the u.k. should not be contributing to any further euros own bailout fund. how can you pay taxpayers be

certain that our contributions to the imf will not be used for such a purpose when the u.k. has only 4.29% of the votes in the governing body? >> the imf has the extremely tough and clear rules about when it can and cannot lend money. that is why it cannot nor would we support putting money into a bureau bailout fund. that is not the role of the imf. that must be the role of esfs/ . the imf can lend money and all countries in distress but no country has ever lost money on the landing to the imf. >> the prime minister keeps talking about rebalancing the economy. we have seen a 25% reduction in the value of the pound which should have made it competitive yet the private sector is simply

not taking up the slack and not doing so because there is no confidence out there. don't we need something else to build confidence? >> the worst thing we can do for competency is abandon the plan to deal with our debt and deficit. you can see what is happening in countries like italy that don't have a proper plan. that have higher interest rates at all the problems that brings. you are right to say we have had a depreciation in our currency that should lead us to be more competitive. if you'll look at our export figures, we are seeing a good increase in exports. tomy constituents don't want pay taxes to bail out the euro. can the prime minister remind us who got this country into the permanent europe sss ander got us out of it? >> none of our constituents want to pay taxes to bail out the euro is on. that is not what our taxes

should go toward. there was the european financial stability mechanism which we were part of and i got us out of that. we are still at risk of that because of a bad decision agreed to buy the last government. >> if continues to fail to deal with the crisis, what will the prime minister do to be set the uk? >> we have to put in contingency plans for any of these countries leaving the bureau's own. for obvious reasons, if you start describing exactly what you can do, you would set off chain reactions. if you want to discuss with a treasury minister probably the elements of any plan, i'd say you are at liberty to do so. >> the understanding that greece or italy or anyone else leading the bureau's own would require a treaty change.

>> i believe you are right. there is nothing in the treaty that allows a member to leave the bureau's own. my sense is or that to happen, some sort allowance would be made. it would involve, at some stage, a treaty change to make sure it was legal. >> the prime minister suggested he is in favor of a global financial transaction tax. that will only happen on a global basis of people take that seriously what action steps the prime minister to look at cannes summit to promote this? >> i spoke on this at the sessions. i said we supported it at a global level. sitting around that table are other european countries and european institutions including

the european commission who have spent this money several times over. women talk about the european budget, is a great way to raise -- when we talk about the european budget, it is great to talk about that. climate change talk seems to cover all the climate change changes and that is not really the case. >> it is likely that the chinese conditions for buying into euros then -- into yours and debt which would be directly against national interests in defense. given that requires the unanimous decision by all eu member states, could the prime minister confirm that should that be required that the u.k. government would veto that request? >> we don't support the lifting of the arms embargo. in the discussions at the g-20, there was no sort of shopping list from the chinese.

clearly, it is in the interest of china as it is in ours, that the bureau's own crisis it dealt with. china has a huge export market in europe and china on huge amounts of european debt. this is the reason why china, like britain, subscribes to the imf and will support an increase in its resources. >> the prime minister said the actions on jobs include many things that broadness it is already doing. -- that britain is already doing. how many minutes were spent talking about these? >> a great deal of the first day was spent talking about the condition of the world economy and particularly the fact that economies in the developed world are seeing very low rates of growth. i also had a meeting with his leader of thetuc and other trade

unionist to discuss specifically the issue of growth and jobs and how we can. -- prevent youth unemployment rising. i don't know of my predecessors found time for these meetings but i was delighted to have one. >> the prime minister, did you see any evidence that the g-20 that it is a fanciful notion to expect china to bail out europe? >> i would not underestimate the huge pressure that the bureau's own leaders are under to come up with a solution to the crisis in the euro is shown very clearly, there are huge ideological differences. completely outs of the question the other countries like china or saudi arabia might want to contribute to the euro zone fund.

the rest would be taken by the bureau's own money and not by the chinese or other money. in the end, there is no substitute for the year rose an acting first to sort out its difficulties. >> who were the country's persuaded by the prime minister that they had to borrow for further discretionary measures? >> there is a list and the action plan for growth and jobs and that says which countries could borrow more. there are countries such as canada and china and others. >> will the prime minister reassure the house that he will not take the advice of the hon. gentleman opposite to increase the deficit to artificially boost growth because the consequent rise in interest rates and inflation would cause enormous damage to small

businesses and families right across this country? >> you are absolutely right. we went to the g20 summit arguing for a $20 billion a pound increase this year, at the same time, we would say that we would get out of the imf, they would conclude that we are completely barky. >> wouldn't it be better for us to help the greeks to default now rather than later? >> we have argued very consistently that part of any solution has to be a very decisive writing down agreed to death. they cannot afford the debt they currently have. that is the plan they offered some have said that is not even enough. unless you write down the debt significantly, you may not have a proper solution. >> you have rightly argued that

fixing the euro zone is good for euros own countries. you have announced that we are making contingency plans because of that failure? >> it is difficult to say more about it in the house. i will discuss this with the treasury minister whether we can say more. these plans would have to be very wide ranging and cover all sorts of different eventualities. >> does the prime minister have an asset -- an estimate the great britain would occur from the fund that was supported by the last labor government? >> we have managed to keep out of the european elements of the great bellsouth. that has said two iterations and

we were not involved in the first we were not involved in the second. -- idea ofc of i'd using a efsm was announced by britain. >> one of the key issues is bureaus and knees to recapitalize a number of banks that are quite weak. can you talk about the relative strength of u.k. banks? >> on the current plan for the recapitalization, british banks would not require any additional capital. they are already quite capitalized. there is a concern that as the europeans moved to recapitalize their bags, it is important that they don't do that purely by shrinking bank balance sheets but to make sure that landing does not decrease in the

european union. >> we know the danger of ignoring the political reality of the current situation. setting the euro at any cost is in the long term interest of journey but not necessarily that of the taxpayers of the united kingdom. surely, the ecb must be the lender of last resort. >> i think the point about the future of the bureau, we should take a very hard view of this. all the evidence is that a discipline to break up of the year would have very bad effects on all the economies within europe and would have bad effects on britain. you could make longer-term arguments about what it might mean but in the short run, there is no doubt that when we try to secure growth and jobs in this country, a disorderly breakup of the european zone would not be good for britain. >> i would like to thank the prime minister for the thoughtful and constructive

leadership he offered at the g- 20. the debate has been quite narrow around greece over in recent weeks. what is the prime minister's interpretation of the situation in italy? >> we should be careful not to speculate on other countries. we see the requirements that those that are lending money to italy want to see a clear and consistent plan with getting on top of their deficits and when they see that, interest rates will come back down again. it is a lesson to any country that if you don't have credibility in the market, york interest rates could go up. >> do you agree that the u.k. already has a financial package? >pact? >> one point that bill gates made to me is that if other european countries introduced their own shares, they might

find that they can get to the 9.7% of gdp. having ait -- without financial transaction tax. that might be quite a good answer. >> statement by the home secretary of -- >> as the house of commons moves on to other business, prime minister camera goes before the liaison committee tomorrow to answer more questions about the british economy. you could once that hearing tomorrow on this cspan networks and you can see prime minister cameron answer questions every wednesday from the house of commons at 7:00 eastern on c- span 2. we also have former secretary of state madeleine albright leading a discussion on the arabs pray and transition that a number of

arab countries are going broke after a number of leadership changes. you can see live coverage beginning at 5:00 p.m. eastern. the u.s. senate gavel in at 24 general speeches. they will start debate and ending a 3% tax on federal contractors. you concede that live on c-span 2. on c-span 3 today, at 4:00, carl levin from the senate armed services committee will discuss pakistan and afghanistan. cbs news chief correspondent talks about covering foreign conflicts which is part of kalb series. ogan atd with lo missgqa 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> you pay taxes on money you make any country. united states taxes you

globally. you are being taxed twice for the same count. it makes u.s. companies very anti-competitive and it worsens them. >> tonight, gary shapiro and recommendations from members of the deficit reduction committee. >> we could have this money come back here, come back into the economy at 5% or 10% and tie this to capital investment and that makes sense . >> "the communicate" tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2. >> president above will talk about an initiative to encourage hiring of veterans have live coverage is at noon eastern right here on this network from the white house rose garden. until then, i look at the future of manufacturing with the executive director of the small manufacturers coalition about what they need to do to stay competitive in the u.s. and abroad. span 2.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: turning to economic business matters, specifically manufacturing, we have the executive director of the american small manufacturing coalition, carrie hines. thank you for being here. guest: thank you for having me. host: what is a small business manufacturer? guest: any manufacturing firm that has less than 500 employees. host: how is that sector doing right now? guest: relatively well, given the economy. we recently did a study showing the great challenges that they can overcome. host: what do you think that they are? guest: nearly six out of 10 manufacturers may have a leadership cnge in the next five years. ere is a huge possibility that when baby boomers retire, they need to get labor in replacement positions.

host: from the bureau of labor statistics regarding manufacturg, 11.8 million employees in the count. would those be small manufacturers? guest: 9.7% are small. host: the most recent average for weekly hours, about normal, 40.5. the wage is $23.90. what has allowed that sector to do well? guest: one of the things that the american public probably does not grasp is that small manufacturers are critical to e supply chain. products that they use every day. i believe that because the economy is still -- consumers are still buying the products that manufacturers make. host: let's but the numbers on the bottom of the screen for our guest, carrie hines.

lines for democrats, republicans, and independence. -- independents. what are the challenges right now? guest: another thing concluded in our studys that sustainability has played an important role in manufacturing. two years ago we did a study showing that sustainability is something of importance to manufacturers. from 35% a couple of years ago to 39%. host of we want to mention that there is a fourth line for small manufacturers. 202-628-0184. we will get to your calls in just a moment. when you look at federal policy in the government, how does federal policy look at small manufacturers as opposed to larger ones?

guest: there are policy issues like taxation and regulation. but small manufacturers are obviously affected. there are programs out there to help small manufacturers. one program is the manufacturing extension program. whereby technical assistance and consulting services go to manufacturers. st: legislation on the hill to generate jobs, it is being distributed in various places on both sides of the aisle. ood that argument into small business. of what -- plug that argument into small businesses. what might change? guest: what is lacking is skilled labour to fill those jobs. we need to continue to provide resources to help those small

manufacturers continue to grow their businesses, becoming innovative and more productive. host: getting viewers in for those chats, michael is the first on the republican line. we are talking about small manufacturing. caller: what would happen if congress passed a law providing all iorters to meet all of the environmental, labor, and safety standards in effect for u.s. manufacturers? thank you. guest: a great question. to meet all of the regulations required, those with the challenges when they tried to implement those requirements. there are impacts that we need to consider before passing those laws. i would need to look closer at the legislation. host: charleston, south carolina. terry, hello there.

morning, terry. caller: hello? for all i am on. host: yes, go ahead. caller: in the community, manufacturerst 300, 400 employers, they have a big impact on the community. i do not think that people realize that those persons that have a commitment to the community, now you have got absentee homeowners that have no commitment to the community. what do you think about that? guest: i think it is definitely -- you hit the nail on the head, when you said those small manufacturers being important to their community. i think that companies need to look at their impact on the local economy. the company needs to employ more local workers, but also get

involved in the community. host: what is it like for small manufacturers to get loans? guest: difficult, to say the least. there are legislation out there, multiple discussions being had about improvement. that is one of the biggest challenges. host: what about that challenge? they cannot grow, they cannot hire? how curran is that? -- current is that? guest: there are many manufacturers out there that cannot purchase the equipment that they need. host: tampa, florida, good morning. woody, what do you make? guest: we make would for guitars and vases -- caller: we make the for guitars and bases.

host: have his business? guest: the same, no matter what. i am one of those job creators, " anquote unquote. all of those potential business creators out there, every one of my vendors is american. we make everything that we do with these guitars here in america. simple truth. i hear everyone talking about reducing taxes on business, getting rid of a whole bunch of regulations, we will grow jobs. i am here to say that you can cut my taxes to zero, you can take every regulation from the epa, osha, and everyone else and tear up the books and say that it is free rein, and i still

would not -- i have spoken with all of my vendors -- none of us would ever beble to hire another employee until you didn't reach a deal with the demand problem in this country. -- until you deal with the demand country in this country. no one has money because no one has jobs. there are $3 trillion -- i was listening to former president clinton on c-span just yesterday -- $1.20 trillion held by the banks that they are just sitting on. $1.70 trillion that 75 companies on this planet are holding in their treasuries. unless they start hiring people to make things and putting them in a warehouse and letting the lag time take up -- meaning that to hire bunch of people that

you do not expect to sell the stuff tomorrow -- but just because people have a job, in the next six months of a might stop -- they might start buying stuff. then and only then will we be able to bring the economy back into what it was. host: a number of points there, beginning with the all encompassing tax issue. guest: i agree that it affects small manufacturers. i also agree with the caller, it will love solve all the problems. the study that we completed showed that manufacturers look to outside resources to help them overcome some of their challenges. it is not just about taxation and eliminating regulation. it is about providing the resources to help them succeed. host: in terms of the next

generation report, explain that globally, those dynamics between small manufacturers here and in the rest of the world. host: a great question. there is a significant difference. 41% of small manufacturers believe that they have the equipment in place to become actively involved. that is compared to 65 large manufacturers. there is a significant difference. host: eddie, republican, good morning. guest: corporate tax candidates, lowered that to 15 -- caller: corporate tax rates, lower that to 15% so that we can compete. we need tort reform. we had a ski slope on turkey mountain. we had ice skating, rover's

skating, a dance hall. even 4h had to close because the insurance rates were too high. you need tort reform to get the manufacturers and businessmen back with a chance. guest: i agree. we definitely have to look at toward reform. it is about the cost, decreasing the cost of providing those products. host: our guest is the executive director of the american small manufacturers coalition. smallmanufacturers.org is is the web site. guest: on the website we have to study that we conducted this summer. it contains the evaluation and performance that we believe is critically important. host: tell us re about your organization and have it started. guest: we a an organization of

the manufacturing partnership center. guest -- host: is it spread about evenly across the country? guest: fairly evenly. located closer to their large minute -- they are located closer to the large manufacturers. the change in leadership is one of the biggest challenges. we need to help small manufacturers, provide themith the resources to help to export more efficiently, bringing their practices and improvements to cost savings. those challenges are continuing. host: florida,illiam, small manufacturers. what do you produce? caller: of plating company. -- a leading company.

host: how many employees? caller: 21. host: how long have you been in buness? caller: about 20 years. business has improved. people that were doing plaiting overseas are finding that when there is a problem, they have to wait for on-time delivery. business has been growing. host: what would you say to the lawmakers in washington? caller: get the banks to help the small business. the problem is that banks generally want you out of the bank now. even though you pay on time and everything is going good. you have been with them through the hard times and they just want to decrease their exposure to small manufacturing. they want you to move to a different bank, which is very difficult today. they also have eight different

manufacturers in the building. the banks, huntington in particular, say that they have too much money involved in commercial industrial real estate. even though we have never missed a payment and our taxes are up to date, they will insist on trusties in the event that we cannot transfer the loan to anher bank. it is impossible today. these of the types of things that occurred. these other banks that are not able to give us loans, these smaller banks, describing them as downpour fill list and so heavy in real estate that they cannot loan any money of any kind. host: any questions or further point for the guest? caller: what about the ability to loan to small manufacturers?

guest: -- host: would you like to elaborate on his comments? guest: riyad looking for a capital backing from banks to provide that funding to small manufacturers. right now, most of them are in the process of being evaluated. washington is looking at that issue and, unfortunately, i do not have anything on that process right now. host: charles, in vienna, good morning. caller: i was calling to say to the republican party th all they talk about is lowering taxes. one of the reasons that small businesses are hurting and that manufacturing is hurting is that there are soany people out of work, they are cutting teachers. they want to cut the employees from government. when we have teachers, those are

real jobs. they buy dishwashers. they buy refrigerators. they buy homes and cars. manufacturing is downfall because we continue to cut, cut, cut. we have seen, from this tax cut, wh they have done. taxes, they do not even have to pay we need to look at not trying to lay off everyone and cut everything. they need to start investing in our schools and highways. those are jobs. real jobs. government jobs are still jobs. people use those jobs to create manufacturing. for if you do not have a job, you cannot create manufacturing. republicans need to stop.

guest: i agree that we have to look at both sides. we have to look at making significant cuts, but in the funding that we do have, investing it properly. one of the policies that we support is the investment in manufacturing extensive partnerships. small programs that cost the federal taxpayer $120 million, providing a 32 to one return on investment. host: democratic line, steen, good morning. caller: yes. i have been having this problem with -- i do not understand -- why not have the people from whirlpool open their own country -- company?

why not take it all and invest in our own united states companies, the people that take it overseas can sell it to people overseas at $2 per hour. when bread goes down, we cannot afford to dollars for an hour. -- tito -- $2 per hour. guest: one thing that we have found is that many manufacturers are bringing back suppliers from overseas to the u.s.. because of the lead time and customization, innovative products need to be in place. host: details on bureau of labor

statistics in the united states on the small business personal manufacturing sector, there were 5000 jobs added based on the last report out there. the average weekly hours, 40.5 with an average wage of $23.90 cents. guest of these are significantly higher than if -- guest: these wages are significantly higher than other sectors. compared to $63,000nnual salary for non-manufacturing employees. i think that manufacturing provides significant, good jobs for american workers. host: at the same time we talk about countries not being able to --