if you would like a copy of today's program, or to learn more about the national press club, go to our website press.org. thank you very much. we're adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015]

>> democratic leader harry reid announces morning that he will not seek reelection after five terms in the senate. he released a video statement this morning that reads and part, this accident has allowed me to have a little bit of downtime, i have had time to ponder. as a result, i will not run for reelection. here's a look at a portion of the video where he talks about his plans for the remainder of the term. senator reid: this accident has

caused us for the first time to have downtime. i have had time to ponder and think. we have to be more concerned about the country, the senate, the state of nevada than us. as a result of that, i will not run for reelection. don't be too elated, i will be here for 21 months. you know where i will be doing the same thing that i've done since i came to the senate. >> some news that schumer could become the new leader. lisa mascaro tweets, senator reid says that schumer-durbin worked it out. he also gives notable shout outs to murray, saying, she's a

champ. a look now at the white house briefing. it just wrapped up. it's about one hour. press sec. earnest: good afternoon, everybody. let me start by speaking for all of you when i say, synchronous it is friday. i don't have any openings. we can go straight to your question. reporter: thank you. [indiscernible] is there any reaction to senator reid coming out and endorsing chuck schumer? press sec. earnest: i saw the reports. obviously, it is the responsibly of democratic members of the senate to decide who the senate democratic leader should be. there was a time when the president took place in those discussions, at this point, we will lever up to them to decide. obviously, the president -- as

he has indicated in his statement, has a deep appreciation for senator reid and all that they have accomplish and working together over the past six years, and even before that. the president is looking forward to continuing to have senator reed asid as a close partner. reporter: it seems, though, that the endorsement for schumer comes after german -- durbin. does the white house or the president have any thoughts? press sec. earnest: i'm not sure . well, i will say, the president obviously has close relationship with a substantial number of members. we closely value the relationship with senator durbin and senator schumer. the president does not plan to

enduorse. at this point, we are looking forward to senator reid, the current leader of the senate democrats, as we -- as the president makes the most of his remaining time in office. reporter: one question on iran and the talks heading into the final weeks. what is the confidence level of the white house that an agreement will be reached by march 31? press sec. earnest: it's true. secretary kerry secretary mondays, undersecretary sherman, and others on the negotiating t team are continuing to me in switzerland. we do anticipate that some representatives from the eu will join those meetings. those meetings will continue through the weekend.

as we have seven past, and in recent weeks important progress has been made. this president is not going to stop short -- this president will not accept an agreement that does not a cop as our goals, which is to cut off every pathway that iran has to acquiring nuclear weapons. and securing iran's commitment to cooperate with a set of intrusive inspections to verify their compliance with agreement. we have been very clear about what those general guidelines are. it will require iran to make substantial commitments, and specific commitments. i would say, the odds of success in this endeavor have not appreciably change over the last few weeks because i ran will

have to make some very serious commitments in order to reach an agreement. roberta. reporter: the president is expected to talk to other leaders this weekend i had of those deadlines early next week on the iran talk. press sec. earnest: it's possible that the president could telephone other world leaders. over the course of today or over the weekend. if he does so, we will let you know. reporter: on yemen, i'm wondering how concerned the white house is on the military action happening there and the in cubic feet -- inc. youibancy of the conflict with rise? press sec. earnest: we have seen in the past the extremist groups that aspire to carry out acts of

violence against the west, including the united states, often try to capitalize on those situations, establish a safe haven, and plot attacks against the west. we will continue to be concerned about that taking place in yemen. the fact is we have been concerned about those activities in yemen for quite some time. i have acknowledged over the course of the last week or so that the instability in yemen does not enhance our counterterrorism efforts in that country. we continue to have significant counterterrorism resources and abilities in yemen. that means that we are able to -- based on resources that we have in the region and relationships we have in the region -- we are able to apply significant pressure to the leaders of extremist organizations that may be operating there. that pressure has advanced our efforts to keep the american people safe, and we will

continue to apply the pressure. reporter: will you play counterterrorism efforts on hold? press sec. earnest: i do not have an update on our counterterrorism operations at this point, other to say that we stop capabilities in the region that allow us to apply pressure on extremist groups that may be operating in yemen and plotting against the west. we continue to have resources in the region, relationships in the region that are beneficial to those efforts. reporter: with saudi arabia now essentially working against iran in yemen and the u.s. supporting saudi arabia, does that affect the working relationship in regards to the nuclear negotiation with iran? press sec. earnest: it shouldn't. we have been clear with the fact that the list of grievances that the united states has with iran are lengthy -- is lengthy. whether it is iran's destabilizing activities

throughout the region, their support of terror, and the unjust detention of americans we have a long list of concerns. that concerning behavior includes menacing israel. what we are focusing on now is trying to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. that is why we are focused on the negotiation on that goal. because of a long list of concerns that we have with iran it makes it all the more important that we prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. the president believes that the best way for us to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is to reach a diplomatic agreement. that is what we are pursuing, and we are hopeful that that is something we will be able to do. it will require, as i mentioned iran make a very serious

commitments. we will see if they are able to do that. reporter: are u.s. and iran working against each other now in yemen -- which is now in shambles -- does that not put further strain on the table? press sec. earnest: again, the list of grievances that i've run through have existed for a long time. they predate the beginning of these diplomatic negotiations. i would not characterize a significant increase in those tensions. the tensions over those issues have been in place for quite some time. they are serious. they are certainly tensions that the administration take seriously. in fact, they are part of what makes it so important that we prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. a nuclear armed iran would be more dangerous when they menace israel, or when they support

terrorism around the world, or when they engage in destabilizing activity -- it would be only more destabilizing. that is why we have put such as premium on succeeding in preventing iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. reporter: is it still 50-50? press sec. earnest: it is still at best 50-50. those are the odds given the likelihood of reaching an agreement by the deadline. reporter: in israel, we have seen the ambassador to the u.s. having dinner. his administration looking forward to a face-to-face meeting with someone high in the administration? press sec. earnest: i do not have any meetings to announce. obviously, the president telephone benjamin netanyahu last week where they had a conversation. in the course of that telephone call, they committed to keeping open lines of communication, not

just between the two leaders but just as importantly, between the national security officials in both countries. that's for a couple reasons. the first is the u.s. commitment under the leadership of president obama to unprecedented security cooperation between the u.s. and israel remains. and, the president and prime minister netanyahu want to keep open a line of communication as the newly formed government begins to make policy decisions that the prime mister believes are in the vestiges of israel. the president has also made clear that we will continue to do with israel as the diplomatic progress with iran is made or not made, as the case may be. we will keep them updated on the talks. that will require conversations. those kinds of communications are indicative of the close

relationship between the united states and our allies. certainly, the alliance between the united states and israel a strong and a priority for this the administration. that is evidenced by our ongoing security cooperation commitment to cooperate on issues. reporter: you don't see the meeting happening anytime soon? press sec. earnest: there's nothing like that that has been scheduled at this point. i would not rule out additional high-level conversations. let's move around a little bit. reporter: thanks, josh. at this point, with two days left before the phenomenal deadline on the agreement how often is the president being breached? -- briefed? press sec. earnest: i can tell you that the president is receiving at least daily updates on the status of ongoing negotiations in switzerland. this is a priority for him. that's why, again, i ran through the list of people

participating in these talks. secretary kerry, the undersecretary at the state department, wendy sherman. a lot of high-level people, and the president being regularly updated. reporter: is it called upon -- ac called upon to make a ruling on any point of contention? press sec. earnest: those updates that he receives our substance to -- are substantive. there is a useful back and forth. to the extent these conversations are just one way. i would anticipate that that would continue over the weekend as well. reporter: and of march, in other words, tuesday at midnight

whatever time zone we are in? press sec. earnest: you want to set up a countdown clock? reporter: absolutely. are all the rage. some of these are very hard issues to nail down. how open are you to extending it one day, two days, three days, so on? press sec. earnest: i would not want to prejudge the outcome of this point. we have been clear that the and of march is a firm deadline. that is simply because these negotiations have taken place over the course of more than a year. that should be ample opportunity to reach an agreement. we are tight about highly complex, difficult issues. i don't think we would be surprise that these types of negotiations take some time. surely, more than one year should be enough time to at least reach a political agreement, whereby all of the parties -- essentially in this case, iran -- can make specific

commitments to the framework for a broader nuclear agreement. we continue to be hopeful that that is something that will occur. the likelihood of success hasn't necessarily change. reporter: [indiscernible] the u.s. and other powers are wanting very specific language and iran is looking for something else -- press sec. earnest: i do not what to characterize the nature of the conversations. the united states and our allies that are participating including china and russia -- what we are all seeking our commitments from iran that would shut down every pathway to a bomb that iran has, and would seek iran's commitment to submit

to intrusive inspections to verify their compliance with the agreement. that's what we are seeking. we intend for those commitments to the specific. at the same time, we have also been clear that these conversations are highly technical. to ensure that the agreement is being fulfilled, we are going to seek some very specific technical commitments as well. after this -- if a political agreement can be completed by the deadline, that would essentially establish a framework for the kinds of technical talks that would take a few additional months. the deadline for those more technical talks would be the end of june. again, this is a situation where the devil is in the details. being able to pin down those details is important, but where we need to start is with the outlines of a political agreement. that something we are aiming to achieve by the end of march. reporter: [indiscernible]

would you say at this point we are getting three messages that are the same, or are we getting three different messages from iran of what they want in these talks? reporter: i wouldn't at this point characterize any of the kinds of conversations we are getting from iran. we have confirmed that a letter was passed to the u.s. negotiating team that was intended for president obama and was sent by president rouhani. i would confirmed that that was received by the negotiating team in switzerland. i don't have any information on the contents of that letter. i can tell you that the p5 plus one is united.

the international unanimity of opinion has been critical in our ability to apply pressure to iran, and it will actively contribute to the likelihood of success. we have succeeded in bringing the international community together to pressure iran, and bring them to the negotiating table, and to engage in constructive talks that will prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon. that is no small feat. when the president took office, the international community was fractured over this issue. because of the leadership of this president and the steady diplomacy of his team, we have succeeded in uniting the international community around the goal of preventing iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. we are able -- were able to

compel iran to engage in serious negotiations, because of the way we implemented as stringent sanctions program against iran, and a lot of economic pressure being applied to iran. that has caused a lot of dissension within iran on the wisdom of pursuing a nuclear weapon. that, i think is a pretty substantial reversal and is a testament to the president and the way his view is the best way for us to resolve this particular situation. reporter: would you describe them as having a tougher position at this point? press sec. earnest: i would not. president rouhani confirmed that they are similar views, as far as cutting off the pathway to a new their weapon, and ensure

that iran make specific commitments. reporter: has the rouhani letter been receives your? press sec. earnest: well i will say is that i do feel confident that the time here at the white house is aware of the contents in the letter. reporter: including the present? press sec. earnest: yes. reporter: how does that work, with the letter, do they put in a diplomatic pouch, is e-mailed, is in english? press sec. earnest: interesting question. i have no idea. maybe they said it over in morse code. i have no idea. direct message. it's possible. i don't know that the way the letter is transmitted. i can tell you that the president is aware of the content of the letter. reporter: ambassador rice is meeting yesterday with the nato chief what did she tell him about the reason he couldn't see the president? press sec. earnest: they had a

conversation about a number of policies that the united states is working closely with nato to pursue. it is a useful discussion. there is a readout of the discussion. in the context of the discussion, the national security advisor extended an invitation for the secretary-general to return in may to have aa meeting with the president. i also understand that the secretary had the ability to meet with ashton carter, which i think is a testament to the coronation between our nato partners. reporter: the phone calls that were apparently made, one of the things he wants is a quick removal of the unjust sanctions. the president has said that it would be a much more gradual removal of those sanctions.

is there any consideration of changing that? press sec. earnest: again, i don't want to be in a position of negotiating this agreement from here. i will say, as a general matter what you said about our negotiation is accurate. the president does believe there would be unwise to -- on the first day of an agreement with iranians, take away all of the sections that have been in place for such a long time. what the president envisions is a phased waving of the sanctions. there are sanctions that come from a variety of places. sanctions from the u.n.. executive sections that have been put in place.

of course, the statutory sanctions that congress put in place. the president believes that we need to verify iran's compliance with the agreement, not just over the course of a few days, or few weeks, or few months, but we need to see sustain long-range compliance with the agreement before we start having a conversation about removing things like the statutory sanctions that have been so critically important to our success here. what is built into the sanctions regime is the ability of the president to waive some of the sanctions. there is a way for us to do this in a phased fashion over course of time. the benefit of that approach is that if we detect any sort of variance in terms of iran's compliance with the agreement we can snap the sanctions right back into place. the president believes that we need to keep that framework for sanctions that congress passed in place for a substantial. of time before congress votes to remove them. reporter: about the middle east and the sharp rise in oil prices yesterday. obviously, yemen is not a big

producer. they are small producer. there is some concern that long-term, the impact of instability in the region, and the rising tensions could mean problems for oil prices. i wonder what the assessment or concern is of the white house. press sec. earnest: i would it be well-positioned to give you a sophisticated analysis of the impact of middle east stability on the global oil market. there might be some people who want to take that role. i would not want to be in that position. i will point out that we are keenly aware of this volatility. we have seen a lot of volatility over the last year that is incumbent to the price of global oil. we are mindful of the impact that this kind of instability has -- could have on the oil market. we are aware of that. it is one of the reasons that the president has worked hard to

pursue an approach here in this country that diversifies our sources of energy. both in terms of art domestic production of oil and gas, which is an all-time high, we have over the president's tenure in office increase the amount of energy that is created by solar by 10 times. we have tripled the amount of energy that is produced by wind. we have made a concerted effort to improve energy efficiency in this country. all of which help to make the u.s., and our economy, less susceptible to that kind of volatility in the world oil market. it is something we continue to be mindful of nonetheless. reporter: it was announced that france would release a new push. [indiscernible] will you be ready to support the

french division? press sec. earnest: we are aware of the foreign minister's comments. he was talking about his intention to move forward with a strategy at the u.n. we have not yet seen the text of the resolution. i would reserve comments on a hypothetical resolution at this point. reporter: inspector general of the state department -- press sec. earnest: i know at least one reporter at the "wall street journal" has covered this issue closely. what i can tell you is that i do not have any -- much insight to share as far as nominations that were considered or not considered. why can tell you is that there is a functioning, or even active, inspector general operation in place at the state department during the secretaries -- during secretary

clinton's tenure there. as a recall, there were more than 400 reports during her time in office. i think that is an indication that there was an active functioning office of inspector general that was open and doing important work while secretary clinton was leaving the department. reporter: there were also questions raised by independent groups, as well as congress, as to the role of the inspector general. does the white house maintained that that was adequate enough oversight of the statement at the time? press sec. earnest: again, based on the fact that we saw hundreds of reports generated by the office of inspector general, we can assess that there was a vibrant inspector general office that was operating. there are obviously stuff in that office that take very seriously their responsibility to be a good watchdog, and act independent of the agencies

leadership. that is a mandate and responsibility. based on the fact that they issued hundreds of reports it is apparent that they fulfill that duty. what is also true is that congress, in previous scenarios has not been securely -- has not taken or take early seriously that independent investigations have been undertaken. in the case of thomas pickering or mike mullen, who conducted a review of the department in light of the attacks of benghazi, that was a review that was criticized. i think they can pretty lightly by our congressional republicans. i guess my point is that even if there had been an inspector general leading that particular office, i don't think there's a lot of confidence that that

person would have been respected by members of congress in the republican party. that's why i am a little skeptical of the notion that congressional republicans are particularly concerned about that aspect. reporter: with secretary of state hillary clinton, or any of these state department leadership officials involved in any way with not putting forward a nominee for five years? press sec. earnest: again you without the asset during great clinton for her views on those points. reporter: harry reid stepping down. -- i want to ask you, what is the white house hopeful for when it comes to replacement for harry reid ? reporter: a majority. [laughter] press sec. earnest: white house spokesman mark, everybody. [laughter]

there is no doubt that this white house would like to see a majority of democrats in the state senate. what's also true is harry reid has been assisting was leader of the united states senate. i just and he is one of the longest-serving democratic leaders in the history of that legislative body. he is obviously someone who served with remarkable decision. you have heard me say in the past that so much of what this president has accomplished in congress, particularly during his first two years of in office, would not have been possible without the skill leadership of harry reid. that is one of the reasons that when harry reid does leave office at the end of 2016, he will have a very long list of a college men's that he will be able to point to. he should be justifiably proud of those of publishers. in terms of the next democratic leader. that will be a decision for the democrats in the united states senate, and hopefully -- to

paraphrase spokesperson mark -- hopefully they will have a democratic majority to work with. reporter: the white housee is somewhere on the sidelines as to what they're looking for for the next leader on the hill. they look for someone to fight. [indiscernible] someone who has the strength to fight against the gop. press sec. earnest: i think if you look at the present statement about senator reid that was issued today, that was the first line of the statement. harry reid was a fighter. there is no doubt that his tenacity and skills benefited the country when he served in that position, and as he has served in that position. over the course of the next 22 months when both men say about the remainder of their term, i'm confident that they will work

closely together in the interest of middle-class families across the country. i'm confident that senator reid will fight for his values and priorities, and will benefit the country. reporter: the loretta lynch nomination? press sec. earnest: unfortunately, no. we are up to 139 days. i think the promise has been broken. major. reporter: you brought up the senate majority. you now have a lame-duck president and lame duck minority leader. what affect will that have on the ability to regain the majority? press sec. earnest: i will leave the election analysis to you guys. what we have seen over the last several months is a president who has really taken control of the united states capitol. i think he has been in position where we have been driving the agenda in this town. everything that we see from congressional republicans is largely a response to actions

that this president has taken to move this country forward. i think that speaks to the power that is still being wielded by the president. reporter: will the president vote and his remaining years? press sec. earnest: he is interested in seeing a democratic majority. those elections are quite a ways off. we will have any of time to speculate about that. reporter: on tuesday, the president described his relationship with engine netanyahu as this is like -- business like? did he mean that? the only other person he describes as having a business like relationship is vladimir putin. i'm fiercely asking you if you see is benjamin netanyahu in the same light as vladimir putin. press sec. earnest: i'm not in a position to dissect need relationship between the leaders of the united states and israel.

i know that there is a lot of interest in this. you guys are certainly welcome to consider that. i think the president, when he talked about this on tuesday was clear that he believed the relationship between our two countries was even more important. that relationship is characterized by opening communication, very close security cooperation, and by a commitment to shared values and ties between the people in our two countries. it makes israel are most important ally in the middle east. reporter: i am just using the president's own words. you often admonished us to take the president's words seriously. i is by asking the question. his relationship with putin has been strained, it is strained, and colored by an assessment of what russia has done on the world stage. for the first time on tuesday he used the exact same term to

describe the prime minister of israel. i'm asking if he equates the two? press sec. earnest: i understand. all you have to do is examine the relationship tween our two countries. the united states has a close relationship with israel. they are closest ally in the middle east. our relationship with russia is much different. in many ways much markup located. we have serious concerns about the way that russia has conducted themselves with ukraine. but yet, we are working closely with russia to hold iran accountable and to ensure that iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. there is a lot of interesting consideration of the kind of relationship that we have with russia. i guess i would make the case that that is much more important than -- or even more important

than the relationship between president obama and president putin. again, i can understand the interest in that. i think what we have been clear about is when the president is having these conversations with world leaders, he is doing so to dance the interest of the united states as a relates to our relations with these countries. that is what our primary focus is on. reporter: not in pursuit of a countdown clock, but simply clarity, it is march 31 the absolute deadline after which if no agreement on the political framework is reached, all activity will cease? press sec. earnest: we have not talked at this point about what would happen if no agreement is reached after march 31. the president has talked a lot about how if it is clear that iran is unwilling to reach a specific agreement, he would

certainly consider additional sanctions being placed on iran. that is all going to require additional consultation with our p5 plus one partners, with our partners in the region, and consultation with congress about what the approach moving forward will be. at this point, i'm not going to speculate on that, other than to say these negotiations have been going on for more than one year, and while the terms of this discussion are dated at -- complicated and important, this is a political agreement that if we reach one, we should be able to reach by the end of march. reporter: the three different definitions of sanctions. if you achieve a political framework, none of those sanctions ought to be lifted until after the technical conversation has reached the conclusion at the end of june.

press sec. earnest: my understanding is the way this is structured is the joint plan of action would remain in place even if the political framework is reached until june. reporter:it would be lifted -- no sanction would be lifted until after that? press sec. earnest: that's right. there are certain commitments that iran is making in conjecture with the joint plan of action. that agreement would remain in place. if the political agreement is reached at the end of march, the joint plan of action would remain in place. technical negotiation would be resolved by june. reporter: i'm going to try one more time. march 31 is a high deadline, yes or no? press sec. earnest: we are in a place where we believe that

after more than one year of very difficult conflict negotiations, an agreement, if it can be reached, it should be reached by march 31. reporter: earlier in the week you were firm in saying that yemen remains as successful model against terrorism. do you have any revisions to your comments? press sec. earnest: no, no revision. let's talk about why. the strategy that demonstration has pursued in yemen is not a nation building strategy, it is a counterterrorism strategy. if you evaluate that strategy over the last several years, you will see that because of the strategy we have pursued, we have succeeded in taking someone off the battlefield in yemen. there are a whole host of extremist leaders that are less famous or less infamous, and yet have also been taken off the battlefield because of the government, the efforts of the

united states and our partners in the region. there have also been a number of reports about plots that have been distracted. there was at least one plot that originated from yemen -- because of efforts of the united states and our partners that plot was disrupted. because the efforts of the united states, our allies, and the yemenis, there was another plot that was also famously forded in yemen. i feel confident in saying to you that there are other plots that have not been reported that have also been disrupted because of the success of the strategy that this administration put in place in yemen. that all said, what i also said earlier this week is that the significantly weakened state of the central government in yemen does not enhance our

counterterrorism efforts. that is why the united states is supportive of the u.n. led effort to try and bring all of the sides who are in pretty stark disagreement in yemen around the negotiating table to stabilize the situation in the country. that is part of the united has been supportive of saudi arabia and other persian gulf countries who have taken military action to try and read the action to an end. yemen has been a chaotic place for a long time, including the situation in which our counterterrorism strategy was being pursued, and succeeded in taking any number of extremists off the battlefield and . reporter: john mccain said yesterday that this is an example of the u.s. leading from behind. press sec. earnest: u.s.

involvement in the operation that is being laed by saudi arabia and persian gulf partners is a cooperation we are making at the specific request of the saudis. the saudis have a clear vested interest there because they share a border with yemen. they are concerned about the security of the border. and the united states, because of our close relationship with saudi arabia, is responding to a specific request to provide some assistance in the area. reporter: earlier, it was adjusted that there was no connection between iran and backing the houthi rebels. if i'm coding it right, you say there are a is a long list of grievances. iran has said that they condemn saudi arabia and they have to

stop. he is saying that at the nuclear talks, the does not suggest that the iranians are tying u.s. not getting more involved in yemen, not getting the houthi rebels out, tying that to the nuclear deal? press sec. earnest: that's not the way i perceive the remarks. again, we have been negotiate for more than one year. if iran is serious about making these commitments, then we will be will to reach an agreement by that of march. if they're not serious about making those kinds of agreements, we won't. the president continues to believe that resolving the situation through diplomacy diplomacy that would result in iran not acquiring oakley weapons is -- nuclear weapons is clearly in the best interest of the united states. and it happens to be in the best interest of our partners in the region, including saudi arabia.

the president believes that the best way to prevent iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is through diplomacy. reporter: do you still believe that bowe bergdahl served with distinnction? press sec. earnest: their obvious, issues because i am a representative of the commander in chief. reporter: susan rice, some months ago, went out and said that he served with honor and distinction. was that mistake? press sec. earnest: she was obviously commenting but for any of the station had been conducted. at this point, now that there is an ongoing military investigation, i will not comment. reporter: also, in some of your comments in the last few days, -- and the president said this month ago, a goal is not leaving

at any american soldier behind on the battlefield. what would you say to the families of at least six american soldiers who are believed to have died, or were killed, trying to find someone who is now accused of being a deserter. what do you think to the family? press sec. earnest: i would say the same thing to them as i would say to all of the families across the country. we deeply value their service and commitment to the country. they serve as an integration to all of us, a willingness to put their life on the line for their country and for their comrade. that is something that is worthy of our honor. it is worthy of our deep appreciation. they certainly have that deeper appreciation from everyone at the white house. reporter: one question. i know senator rubio and congressman jordan offered a bill that would roll back the district of columbia and got my

spirit is that reaches the president's desk, would he veto it? press sec. earnest: i have not seen the details. the president has beenn very clear that he bases his possible for us to take a number of steps to put in place measures that would prevent individuals who should obtain a gun from getting one. while the same time, making sure we are protecting the second amendment rights of law-abiding americans. that is what the president is committed to. the president is willing to work with either party that is willing to move in that direction. we have not, over the last few years, been able to make much progress in that regard. the president has indicated on a number of occasions, that is the source of disappointment in the white house. unfortunately, there are members of the congress who do not agree. reporter: this proposal would

allow things like concealed carry. with the white house support any changes to the gun law? press sec. earnest: gun laws made by the district of the columbia should he made by the district government. this is another principle that applies here. in this case, we believe the district of columbia should be able to make their own laws. reporter: [indiscernible] two you have a preview of what they will be talking about? press sec. earnest: we can get you some more details about the conversation. reporter: secretary lou will be going to beijing on monday to meet with chinese officials. the asian infrastructure investment bank has isolated the u.s. from major players that are joining the bank. is there a sense that the u.s. may shift its position and reconsider? press sec. earnest: i don't have

any change in our position at this point. for more on his chair, i would urge you to contact the secretary of the treasury. reporter: on cuba and the upcoming america summit, there will be several cuban dissidents . there is the expectation that the president will meet with raul castro, is there any possibility that he will meet with the dissidents? press sec. earnest: i am aware that some dissidents will attend and participate in some of the conversations. at this point, i don't have any details of the present schedule. in advance of the trip, we will see if we can get you some more details. reporter: nigeria will be holding the election tomorrow. the polls have artie been postponed once. i was wondering if the president has a plan for what might happen in the unfortunate scenario is violence breaks out? press sec. earnest: as nigeria looks ahead to presidential elections tomorrow and gubernatorial elections on april

11, the united states reiterates our support for a peaceful process, the reflects the will of the nigerian people. we have been pleased to see the renewed agreement between president jonathan and his challenger, and respect the outcome of a credible process. this agreement reiterates the agreement that they made him in mid-january. it is very much in the spirit of the message that the president issued earlier this week to the nigerian people, calling on them to express their views peacefully. we certainly continue to be gratified that nigerians political leadership is encouraging the citizens of that country to participate in the election without pursuing violence. we hope that is what they will do. reporter: two questions. yesterday, the ambassador to washington told reporters that there was evidence that the iranian revolutionary guard had

-- if this insight is true, is this a administration concern? press sec. earnest: i do not have an updated assessment about the situation on the ground in yemen. we have expressed our previous concern about bd stably and impact that iran is having on this situation. we continue to have those concerns. reporter: there is in fact a coming together of arab nations -- saudi arabia, qatar, uad, who are very focused now on fighting extremism and the crisis in the arabian peninsula area. press sec. earnest: what we are pleased -- or at least, we understand that saudi arabia is taking this action because of the instability that is along their border. that poses a threat to the security. it certainly makes sense that they would want to take action

to enhance security along the border. as a close partner of the united states, they have asked for support for that mission in light of the unique ability that the united can leverage in situations like this. the president agreed to that request and we are providing assistance both logistical and intelligence, giving them access to intelligence that might benefit their efforts. reporter: also putting ships into the gulf. press sec. earnest: there are a lot of persian gulf countries that are mindful of the situation there. the united states is providing the support requested. bob. reporter: let me try and take a line of questioning with some visual. if you are disclose -- this close to an agreement with iran versus this close, wouldn't you

want the deadline to slide especially because congress is going out of town over the next few weeks.? press sec. earnest: we have been negotiating for over a year. the united states and our partners all believe that if an agreement is able to be reached it is certainly one that we should be able to reach at the end of the month. that continues to be our goal. it will require iran to make some substantial serious commitments in the context of those negotiations. we are waiting to see if that is what they will do. reporter: you will have to worry about people suddenly slamming through sanctions quickly. press sec. earnest: that is true. the senate will not be in session. reporter: is there a buffer, if you will, to fly? press sec. earnest: it is our intention to hold all of the parties who are negotiating this agreement to the edit march deadline that we have set. jared, the last one. reporter: what is the reaction

to the lobbying signed yesterday -- the religious freedom lobbying signed yesterday? press sec. earnest: i have seen that there are number of private businesses, nonprofit organizations that have said the signing of the small props them to reconsider doing business in the state of indiana. including the ncaa that isn't just hosting the final four indianapolis but as their headquarters in indianapolis. all of those is this is an some considering having conventions in indiana have raised concern as to whether all of their employees can be treated rarely in indiana. i think -- -- fairly in indiana. the signing of this bill doesn't seem like it is a step in the direction of equality, justice

and liberty for all americans. that is not just the view of their administration, it is the view of the republican mayor of indianapolis, and a whole host of private sector companies that have concerns about the impact of this legislation. reporter: what about the proposed initiative in california that would allow the execution of a homosexual person? this is again, something that would deftly not be constitutional. it looks like a attorney general harris will be against it. has the president been made aware of this? press sec. earnest: this is the first i'm hearing of it. reporter: what was in, scott kelly is going up the space for one year. the president's meeting with sites and technology people today. is there anything like that -- will the president be watching the lunch? will he be following as commander kelly spent the next year in space? press sec. earnest: this is a

subject of the president has been very interested in. you will remember, commander kelly sat in the commander box during the stay of the union. the president had the opportunity to salute the heroism and courage of this mission. the president is obviously very interested in the mission and its success. he is proud of the accomplishments of the brave americans engage in this effort. i do not know if he will have an opportunity to to watch the launch he is certainly aware of it and will be following the mission over the next year. this is an interesting opportunity for us to gain some new law knowledge on prolonged space exploration on the human body. it should be interesting. the president will certainly be following along, like many

americans. we will have a quick week ahead and call it a week. i will do the week ahead. on saturday, the president will be traveling to florida. he will spend the weekend in florida. i do not anticipate that the president has yet the expectation of making any news while he is down there. he will be accompanied with a pool. if any news happens that, there will be colleagues of years to cover it. the president overturn on sunday evening. on monday cap i think most of you know, the president is leading to travel to boston, where he will participate in the institute established in boston in the name of edward kennedy. he will deliver some remarks at that event. thise schedule for the rest the week remained fluid. as we get some details early next week, we will get you those details.

just because we have some more details in the scheduled to hammer out. have a great week, everybody. >> and congressional news today harry reid has announced he is ending his senate career after five terms and released a video statement this morning that reads that he has had time to ponder and think and has to be more concerned about the country, the senate, the state of nevada. here's a portion of his video announcement where he talks about the plans for the remainder of his term. >> this accident has caused us for the first time to have a little downtime. i have had time to ponder and think we have to be more concerned about the country, the senate, the state of nevada, and as. as a result, i'm not going to run for reelection. my friend senator mcconnell, i will be air force 22 months --

the here for 22 months. >> mitch mcconnell had this to say about the announcement. underestimated often come his distinctive grit and determined focus nevertheless saw him do many challenges. they continue to make him a formidable opponent today. some news that chuck schumer could become the next democratic leader in the senate after harry reid's retirement. lisa mosquera tweeted out that durbin is not kind to become the leader. >> here are some of our featured programs for this weekend on the

c-span networks. on c-span twos book tv, saturday at 10 ago p.m. on eastern, peter wallace and says government housing caused the 2008 financial crisis. sunday jeffrey sachs on a development plan to counter global issues like poverty political corruption, and environmental decay. saturday morning, on american history tv, a discussion on the last major speeches of abraham lincoln and martin luther king junior. sunday afternoon at 4:00, the 1965 meat interview with martin luther king junior. find our complete television schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. call us, e-mail us, or send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation.

like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> this sunday on q&a, eric larson on his new book "dead wake." >> the story gets complicated when the question arises as to what ultimately happened to the lusitania? why was the loser 10 you allowed to enter the sea -- the was opinion -- the ship allowed to enter the sea? this has led to some very interesting speculation about was the ship set up for attack by churchill or someone in the admiralty? it is interesting. i found the no smoking memo. i would have found the smoking memo. there was nothing from church

elder jackie fisher or someone else in the admiral saying, let's let the ship go into the irish sea. nothing like that exists. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's q and a? . >> lead a general election is may 7. david cameron and ed miliband appeared on a live question and answer session program in london. prime minister cameron rejected a previous proposal of a head to head debate but he will take part in a seven party debate on april 2. this is hosted by sky news and channel four. the program is an hour and 15 minutes. kay: welcome to cameron and miliband live. good evening. tonight she's the first big election test for two men. one of them will be been the

uk's next prime minister. dave -- david cameron and ed miliband are the only people with a genuine chance of forming the next government. tonight, we will see what they're made of. >> over the next 90 minutes both men will face jeremy head-to-head and also answer the questions of our studio audience. david cameron will be interviewed by jeremy, then join me to take questions from our audience. after that ed miliband will face questions from the studio and we finish with his head-to-head with jeremy. so let's get to it. the elections start here and now. first off, the prime minister and leader of the conservative party, david cameron. [applause] >> prime minister, do not many food banks were in this country

when you came to power? prime minister cameron: i don't have exact figures but i know they use the banks have gone up in their many amazing volunteers to man those of banks and provide an important service. jeremy: spirit there were 66 when he came to power. there are now 421. 900,000 people took food parcels last year, free food parcels. you talk about broken britain and fixing it. you have not fixed it. it is more broken up than it was. prime minister cameron: i don't accept that. if you look at what's happened with our economy to our 1.8 in a million more people in work than when i became prime minister to quit 900,000 jewish people -- jeremy: increasing food banks a market success? prime minister cameron: has been increasing food bank usage. that's partly because of the difficulties we face as a country. it's also, jeremy come because we change the rules, the previous government did allow

job centers to advertise the existence of a bank. that that would be bad pr. i thought i was a wrong decision, a poor decision so we allowed them to point people towards the banks defended them. the big picture is here, is we want to get more people back to work we've turned the economy , around and it's jobs -- jeremy: it's unacceptable in a rich country like ours that there are that number of people depending on free food they. -- banks. prime minister cameron: obviously what few people to be using food banks and i want more people to have the security of the job but we have created 1000 jobs for everyday this government has been in office. that's a statistic but behind that statistic people are able to provide for their families, who are earning a wage can were able to build a better life. jeremy: how many of those jobs are zero our contract? prime minister cameron: about one in 50 jobs. some people choose your hours contracted for instance, students because they want the flexibility --

jeremy: what about -- prime minister cameron: hold on a second. we outlawed government to do this, the idea of exclusive zero hours contract we can only work for one business. we said that shouldn't happen but it is a myth, some people want to say that jobs that have been created, that's not true -- jeremy: i'm not saying that. is that any way to live -- we had a difficult two years following the deepest recession in our countries history and we are coming out of that and we created 1.89 million jobs. the majority of those have been full-time jobs. most of them have been relatively well-paid occupations only one in 50 jobs is a zero contract and some people choose those that do and want to hire minimum-wage coming to us and we have seen it increase above inflation for the first time in many years and i want to see that go through. we've taken the lowest paid people in the country out of the tax altogether so we can earn 10,000. but before you start paying income tax that is important and has been a priority. this is one of the things people find problematic.

jeremy: if he is looking longer and he has to welcome again. he gets six pounds 75 an hour. he worked between eight and 12 hours a week on average. is that any way to live? prime minister cameron: i want more people to apply -- part-time work. that is what is happening in our economy. it has been difficult. we have had a difficult few years following the longest and deepest recession in our countries history. he created 1.8 9 million new jobs. that is 1000 88 day. the majority of those have been full-time jobs, not part-time. most of them have been in relatively well-paid occupations only one in 50 jobs is a zero contract and some people choose those that do and want to hire minimum-wage coming to us and we have seen it increase above inflation for the first time in many years and i want to see that go through.

we have seen the minimum wage increase now above inflation. we've taken the lowest paid people in the country out of the tax altogether so we can earn 10,000. but before you start paying income tax that is important and has been a priority. jeremy: this is one of the things people find problematic. i'm going to be personal if i may for a second. it is that you would choose, for example to appoint a rich , newspaper editor to which

-- to defend the rich television presenter. what do you have in common with these rich people? [laughter] prime minister cameron: i think it is completely unjustified. stephen green had been appointed by my predecessor to run his business advisory council. i appointed him as a trade minister that was a move that was welcome across british industry. i don't know if that was wrongdoing subsequently. nobody criticized that appointment at the time. jeremy: did you ask them about it? prime minister cameron: i did not ask him about it at that specific time. it was properly dealt with. i said very clearly i didn't didn't know what happened.

i simply answered a question , explaining he was a friend of mine but i am treating the people you work with badly is except the will. -- is not acceptable. what i've done for the last five years is lead a government that has an economy growing back to work, the taxes in the country and i'm not saying we've achieved everything we set out to do. the country is stronger. jeremy: apart from broken britain, one of your slogans last time was that the country was overwhelmed in debt. overwhelmed was the word you used. how much money have you borrowed? prime minister cameron: we have cut the budget deficit in half. jeremy: how much money have you borrowed? prime minister cameron: the amount of money you borrow every year -- jeremy: do you know what it is?

prime minister cameron: i know you borrowed a lot of money. jeremy: do know what the figure is? a mere 500 billion pounds. prime minister cameron: that is a lot less than the previous government was borrowing. the annual overdraft the deficit has come down by one half as a share of gdp and the total debt as a share of our national income is now falling. we're not finish the job. the british people are working incredibly hard on that plan to turn the economy around, getting the deficit down, having public services we can afford and creating likelihoods. if you are saying there are not fast enough to cut the deficit i would agree. all of my opponents have said we should borrow more, spend more. that is the alternative you face. jeremy: is it merely the chasm

between what was said and what was actually done. let's take immigration. you promised you would reduce immigration to the level it was at in the early 1990's, tens of thousands of years. do you know how many people you have let in? prime minister cameron: immigration has not been cut to the tens of thousands. immigration was cut from outside the european union that is down by 13% and we closed down about 800 bogus education colleges but inside the european union, immigration has increased. not least because we have created more jobs in britain that the rest of the european union put together. the economy has been so stagnant people have come here to work so what we need to do now is keep the economy working but fix the broken welfare system. let me make this point if you would like me. there are some key changes i'm going to make. if you come from europe to

britain come you cannot claim unemployment benefits. if you don't have a job in six months, you have to return to the country you came from. you have to work your for four years before you get tax credit for benefits out of the system and you cannot send child benefit home to the family if they are living in another country. those changes taken together, key welfare changes will reduce immigration. jeremy: that is not what you said last time. you have said no it's, butts. we made a promise we will reduce immigration to the level it was at in the early 1990s. you have not done it. prime minister cameron: it is still that is still the right ambition. we achieved the cut. but we haven't achieved it for the welfare changes in order to do it. jeremy: but you accept you have not met -- prime minister cameron: i fully

accept that. jeremy: there is a credibility problem. one of the things you said and you repeated it again. we have no plans to raise vat. he set it to my face at the time of the last election. the moment you got into government, you did raise it. prime minister cameron: there is a crucial difference. we are the government. we know what is necessary and our plans do not involve tax increases. it is very clear. we know what needs to be done. people want to know what is the scale of what needs to be done. one out of every hundred pounds for government i think it is the right approach to try to find 1 pound of waste in 100 pounds of government spending rather than to put up everybody's taxes

which is what my political opponents want to do. you have a choice. bear down on waste and get the public spending under control. or put up taxes with my opponents. jeremy: you said one thing and you did another. prime minister cameron: we said the most important task for the government was to get the economy growing, jobs growing and get the deficit down. on any analysis, and we had a polling, we inherited a situation where britain's deficit was forecasted to be bigger than greece's. i will defend all of those decisions. the right thing for the country and the result, there is a connection between the difficult decisions we had he taken the fact we now have the fastest-growing economy of any major western economy. we created 2 million private-sector jobs, 750,000 businesses. this economy is working. now we need to make sure people

-- i want an economy where people can feel they can get a job, have a livelihood, buy a home. those are the things -- that is what this plan is all about. jeremy: and the spirit of transparency, can you tell us where this 12 billion pounds is welfare cuts is going to come from? prime minister cameron: let me explain. we said there is a 30 billion pounds adjustment that needs to be made. the other political parties have voted for this. that breaks down into 13 billion that these -- needs to be saved 12 billion and welfare, and 5 billion from cracking down on tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance. when it comes to welfare, we have identified freezing work benefits for two years to raise some of that money. the 12 billion compares with $20 billion saved in the last part

-- last parliament in this current parliament by the government on welfare. jeremy: do you know where these cuts will fall? prime minister cameron: it is possible to make the savings in welfare. we may $20 billion -- jeremy: do you know and you're not telling us or do you not know? prime minister cameron: we know there will be difficult decisions and we had to go through every part of the welfare budget that we believes as we said 20 billion and welfare, we will be able to find further 10 billion and welfare savings. let me give you some more examples. we will cut the welfare cap we put in place saying no family should get more than 26,000 pounds a year and welfare. we will reduce that to 23,000. we think that is the right thing to do. when it comes to young people when they leave school, they

should be either earning or learning and doing an apprenticeship. they should not be able to go straight onto unemployment benefits and housing benefits. all these things, changing welfare is not just about saving money. it is about trying to help people. jeremy: when i talk about transparency and you don't tell us what you will do. let me ask you a very simple question about foreign policy. what do think has been your biggest foreign-policy disaster? prime minister cameron: other people i am sure will highlight difficult things we have had to deal with. i would argue good things we have done are cutting the european budget, the first to achieve that. getting out of the bailout scheme coming giving money degrees, those are successes. we have a very challenging situation today in libya. jeremy: do you regret going to libya and promising -- and

promised -- you use the word promise, the people of britain and france will stand by you as you build your country as your democracy. do you regret saying that? prime minister cameron: i don't regret saying that. i think it was right. it was right to stop the kernel when he was going to butcher his on people in benghazi. if we had not stepped in, we would have seen a massive catastrophe in benghazi of people butchered. it was the right thing to do. i don't except that we left the libyan people after that. we put in it, military training, political assistance. it does not been possible to get the different -- it is not been possible to get the different libyan parts of government together to get them to put down their weapons. we're still trying with people out there. it has been a very difficult

situation. jeremy: can i ask a quick question about europe? what would it take for you to vote no in the referendum on the participation in the european union. prime minister cameron: i think the situation today is that what we need is a reform and then a referendum that the british people, not me but the british people watching at home have that choice. jeremy: the implication certainly then it's intolerable. prime minister cameron: i think we need to improve on a current membership. this organization works to an extent for us. we get the trade, important cooperation. what europe is not working. that is why we need the renegotiation. those who say have a referendum straight away, giving the people a proper choice.

stay in a organization or leave. it will be the british people's joys. there's only one way to get a referendum. none of my principal opponents will promise a referendum. jeremy: you said you will not stand for a third term. that means that a vote for cameron is a vote if you are successful as leader of the party and the prime minister perhaps for two, three, four years after which, it is someone else. prime minister cameron: i said every day and a full second term. what i was doing in that interview was giving an honest answer to an honest question. i think people need to know that sort of thing. are you one of those leaders that will go on and on and on or

actually really passionate about what you are doing? after that, 10 years, two terms i think politicians do have a , date by which they need to say it is time for someone else to take over. i am not a person who thinks you are indispensable. it is important to remember we are not indispensable. jeremy: thank you. coming next, questions from the audience. ♪ kay: welcome back. the prime minister has been interviewed by jeremy and now it is the turn of our studio audience to put their questions to him. without further do, prime minister here we go. let's start with matthew. >> what do think our ed

miliband's best qualities? prime minister cameron: thank you for the question. i think all of us who put ourselves forward or believe in serving the public, we disagree with each other sometimes passionately sometimes noisily. we all believe in doing the right thing for our country. one thing i admire about ed is when we had to take difficult decisions about sending the but his forces into -- british forces into help with others to try to defeat isis he stepped forward and said this is the right thing to do with students together and vote together in the house of commons. >> you did: weekend us a couple, didn't you? prime minister cameron: we sometimes use phrases that we use over the top.

i took my children yesterday and they said if we behave like that at school it wouldn't be so good. there is a point to it though what is it is the time of the week when the prime minister has to demonstrate you are across the issues. it does make the government accountable to parliament in a way that if you are not across the issues things will change , pretty quickly. we don't always behave as well as we should. kay: i think bridget is there. >> in a few months time, i will be 79. i am a retired professional . following a traffic accident yet i remain proactive in the community and passionate about the provision of care for the elderly and i feel that we should be treated with dignity and respect.

would you consider it appropriate the cabinet minister for older people, one who would show empathy with older people? prime minister cameron: first of all thank you for your advocacy because they do matter and making sure that we treat retired people with dignity and security in their old age after the full working life is one of the most important things we can do as a country and that's why i have been so clear. the pension benefits, they will continue for everybody. it should be a right and we need to make that clear. i was asked this question the other day about should we have a dedicated representative in the cabinet? i will think about it but i'm a little bit worried about it. i don't want older people's

concerns to be restricted to one person in the cabinet. i want my ministers to be thinking how do we treat senior citizens. i want my health minister to think how do we treat people in hospitals and care rims? i want to make sure we are doing this right. i want to make sure with the education minister is thinking about and something i want to continue with forever. i would be worried about having one person say they were the only person who thought about older people. in the end, if we are not doing right by older people, blame me, because i run the government and i think we have to get this right. but the pensions have been the key to the government about the breaking tension in the earnings. the pension has been protected by from some of the difficult decisions. kay: let's bring in tom cosgrove.

where are you, tom? what is your question? >> it's been argued we haven't seen yet in terms of cuts to public services. how will these be in the government? prime minister cameron: we have had to make difficult decisions. a lot of those i didn't want to have to make that i became prime minister at the time when the economy was close to the brink when the budget deficit was forecasted to be higher than greases -- greece's and we had to make important deficit decisions. the economy in chaos i wanted to stop that. we have gotten the deficit down by what we need to do in the half. next two years is basically similar to what we've done so far. we have to find one pound out of every 100 the government spends and say that rather than putting up people's taxes. so if you think it is the

department spending changes, it is similar to what we have had to do in the previous years and similarly for welfare it is achievable. i wouldn't stand here and say that if i didn't believe it. i want to do this without putting up taxes on hard-working people because you do not tax your way to jobs or growth. we want to keep a strong economy, make the savings and make sure that we do put aside money for the rainy day so that when the next crisis hits coming -- hits, and they do come from time to time, we don't get pushed over the edge and that will be so irresponsible because in the end, we want to make sure that we are not just doing right for this generation but doing right for our children and grandchildren. what we are suggesting is manageable, doable. we can make important commitments by saying the nhs is special. that will get extra money every year. kay: you would want a specific example. >> yes. prime minister cameron: a good

example of saying the benefits should be frozen for two years. that will save 2 billion pounds. that is not an easy decision to make but it's important people can see that it's better off and we try to keep on creating those jobs as we have done and we find savings including from efficiency. we have saved 20 billion pounds by just being a bit smarter. we still don't have one company that owns all the government buildings. businesses have to do this every year. they don't get more efficient and say that is it, i am finished. they think every year, how can we save money and provide a better service without spending so much money. we've had to do that. one example -- kay: what we bring in the police

officer -- you have been a police officer for 22 years. >> my question to you is what -- what the conservatives reverse their decision and come back to the service which is now more than ever overburdened? prime minister cameron: first of all, thank you very much for your service. i know you put your lives on the line everyday to keep us safe and i have a huge respect for what the police do for us. but i was going to say what they -- what a grand example the police have been over the last five years. we did have to make reductions in spending on the police so the budget came down by some 20% but at the same time they did it such a good job that crime has come down by almost 20% and we managed to get officers out from desk jobs onto the streets and put more civilians into some of

those rules. they combined forces forces and ordered equipment and things together. there is still some more efficiency that we can get out of that but in the end, we have to back the british police to do a great job and they always have my support. kay: the chief constable said that it's on the verge of collapse. he said that last december. prime minister cameron: i don't accept that. kay: is he wrong? prime minister cameron: in lincolnshire, crime has come down. the police are doing a great job. there is more we can do to use modern technology to make sure the crime continues to fall under this government and if government and if we do that then we should be saving money as well. kay: were you happy with that response? >> no comment. kay: let's go to rosemary.

>> it is 20 years this year since the passing of the discrimination act of the u.k. but if you are disabled you are twice as likely to be unemployed and it's getting harder to get vital social care and support. attitudes toward disabled people are hardening. i would like to know what you do going forward to change that for britain's 11 million disabled people. prime minister cameron: have a simple view about this which is we should do everything we can to help disabled people face as few advantages as possible and get genuine equality in the country. the disability discrimination act was brought forward by my good friend and colleague andy -- william hague. it has led to some good changes but you are right the job is not done. one of the things we need to focus on is getting more disabled people into work. this year we got 140,000 more but the gap between the disabled unemployment rate and the

unemployment rate for the whole country is still too big and i want to see that cut in half and i think we can do that but we need a culture change from employers. there are some employers who are absolutely brilliant who go out there and want to recruit people because they are missing out on some of the best talent in the country but not all employers are that good and that's why we established something called his ability confident to try to take this approach so i would say we have more to do but in the end of all comes back to the bigger picture of a strong and growing economy. kay: are you happy with that response? >> partially but i still think there is a lot that needs to be done. you mentioned employment is vital to help people in florida

-- flourish. the independent fund was closed -- prime minister cameron: it's important to local councils have the resources to do this and we just established this fund to try and bring health and social care together more in our country and that could help some of the issues. thank you for the question. kay: let's bring in care of. -- kara. >> how are you going to convince the british public? prime minister cameron: thank you for the question. i think britain is at its best when we are out there treating -- trading, cooperating, and working with others in the world. we are in open country, trading nation, part of the importunate

-- important networks whether it , is nato or the european union . the problem at the moment is it has too many things that drive people mad. people see that it's trying to become too much of the state rather than the organization. trying to take too much power. and i think what we need is a new deal with europe where we say we want to be in europe for trade and cooperation. we want that common market but we want to be part of an ever closer union. maybe the euro zone countries need to do that. we don't and we will keep the pound as our currency. if i can get a new deal from europe, and i believe i can. i sat around the table the last five years. if i can get that deal i think that there is a prospect to say to the british people you choose . you can stay in on this reform

basis, which would be good for britain, or you can leave. but the british public has to be given another choice. we haven't had one since 1935 and it's time we did. kay: we have two more. karyn is with us. >> would you like to see more nhs services provided by private companies? prime minister cameron: i'm sorry. i lost you. >> would you like to see more services provided by private companies yes or no? prime minister cameron: i am happy if there are charities or independent organizations that can provide a great service free as part of the nhs, then i think that is good health care. that is what matters to me. i love our nhs. it has done amazing things for my family. i will never forget taking my desperately ill young son into hospitals, getting into a and e. getting amazing treatment. everything they gave him. i want to make sure that that is always there for families in our

country. now that would always be predominately a national health service provided by the national health service providers, the private sector, independent sectors. it has gone from 5% to 6% under this organization. great organizations like the -- that helping our loved ones and helping to pay for them that it's ok by me. kay: the lady in the blue dress. wait for a microphone if you could. i think we can get a little bit closer to you. >> i am just a little bit confused because i do remember five years ago when you made some serious pledges about the nhs and i saw your billboard.

the reorganization of the nhs that clearly is different and has been a huge top-down organization. in the first closure it is a manifesto and aware i live we -- and where i live we have to take you to court to keep them open so i feel very let down on the policy on the nhs and i'm just wondering if you don't do what you say, the promises he -- you made last time have been broken. how can we trust you next time? prime minister cameron: the promise that we need at the time that we've are going to have to make difficult cuts in the public spending and anyone, the prime minister said we will not cut the nhs and we haven't. we've increased spending by over 12.7 billion pounds over the last five years. what we did in terms of changing the nhs is we got rid of 20,000 bureaucrats in the nhs and we put that money into 9,000 more

doctors and into 7,000 nurses and as a result when you take something like cancer, we are seeing 460,000 people and looking at their potential cancer than we were five years ago. the biggest promise that we may become a more money for safeguarding the money and treating more patients has been kept and if you elect me again as your prime minister, that is the key to this end we will go on investing in the national outcome. kay: prime minister, we are almost out of time that we have time for one more quick answer if you would please. she had lost her voice but she has persevered tonight so she can ask you a question. >> if you could redo your time as prime minister what would it be? prime minister cameron: if i could redo one thing during my time what would it be. it definitely as i said, i haven't delivered. i promised less noise and that

didn't work out. i fully accept that. but i think the most important thing i've had to try to do is turn the economy around and get people into jobs, get the economy growing. we were on the brink. i wish some of the things that we had done, i wish we had done some of those things quicker and sooner because in the end, you have to make this huge choice in 40 tuesday and fashion 42 days time, who will run the country? and i would say what i've learned in the last five years is nothing you want to do will work without a stronger growing economy. those things need a strong economy. >> [inaudible] have you ever had shredded wheat? prime minister cameron: i have actually. but that was a long time ago. [laughter] kay: we are out of time, prime

minister. [applause] kay: thank you. coming up next we will be taking more questions from the studio audience. thank you very much. ♪ kay: again, welcome back to cameron and mellowed and, battle for number 10. now it is turn of the labour leader ed miliband ready to meet the studio audience. [applause]

kay: all you are retired. what is your question? >> you sound gloomy most of the time. [laughter] are things really so bad? miliband: no, but they could be better. and that is the argument of this election. i think this is a choice. do we think this is as good as it gets or do we think we can do better than this? i don't think it is good enough that we have 700,000 people on contract. zero hours i think we can do something about it. the prime minister said he couldn't live on it and i couldn't either. then let's do something about it. if you work a month after month, year after year you don't end up on a zero our contract but you have a right to a regular contract. that is one of the changes i'd make. we could develop better than this. we are a great country.

[applause] kay: paula is next. what's your question? >> i am proud of my working-class background and i'm now a high rate taxpayer. messages often leave me feeling demonized and ashamed. how can i vote for you when you make me feel like this? [applause] miliband: let me see if i can change your mind. i think that what is happening in britain at the moment is it is the very richest in our society. i am talking about the top 1% earning over 150,000 pounds a year doing sort of ok and i think a lot of people including the middle income are finding things are tough. the question is how do we do something about it. i hope you get a different message from you tonight. gushed from me tonight. let me give you an example. tuition fees. some people criticize me for wanting to lower burden from 9,000 to 6,000 to help middle-class families.

i think lots of families are saying, if my child is living in a versa do with war 2000 pounds of debt combat is not a good situation. i want a country where you feel you are not struggling. >> if you are a socialist does that mean you are anti-wealth creation? miliband: it is a democratic socialist. i think the wealth creation is an incredibly important part of building a more prosperous society and a fair society. but the difference with me , and this is important for the audience, the way that we succeed is not simply those of the top doing well but all working people succeeding. i say when working people defeat -- succeed other people succeed. that might sound like a slogan but it's the reality of where the country gets on. so it's not just the bankers with six-figure bonuses. kay: seven-figure bonuses. if you get regular hours and you've got some security going

off to work and getting the right thing for the country, if you're having an nhs you can rely on, that's better for the whole country and we would benefit from that. kay: next, what is your question? >> if you were prime minister , what will the budget deficit be in pounds at the end of five years and how would you achieve it? miliband: 75 billion we would inherit. we want to balance the buck by -- books by the end of the parliament, and cut the deficit every year. and we are going to do it by doing three things. first of all, we will have their -- fair taxes. we will reverse the change in the cameron made. second, there will have to be spending reductions in areas outside like health and education because we do need to get the deficit down and i make no bones about that. it's going to require difficult

decisions. why the conservatives promise to eliminate the promised to eliminate the deficit. kay: let's talk about -- [inaudible] [applause] miliband: i understand that, but because the reason why that hasn't happened is because the living standards have fallen the tax revenues have fallen. so the key is the third element. the tax changes we have announced, the spending reductions. but that element of the raising living standards in the country , it will also get the tax revenue than at the deficit they had the deficit down. kay: let's bring in veronica. what is your question? >> why does labor prefer to deny the people the freedom to choose whether they wish to become a fully fledged member of the eu? miliband: i want us to stay in

the eu veronica. it is not my parody do have a referendum to leave the union. let me explain why. when i look at our country, i know what my priorities will be. to tackle the cost of living crisis, to rescue, to build a future for the young people. i think leaving the eu would be a disaster for the country. strategically for britain whether you want to tackle terrorism or climate change or a whole range of issues, we have to be an outward looking country. i have said that this is a transfer of power. we have in the referendum. it isn't likely to happen. that isn't what the leadership is about. why would i call the referendum in 2017 and plunge the country in the debate, that is something i do not want to see happen. kay: but if you win the next election -- miliband: it is unlikely to

happen. i make no bones about it -- kay: that is a politicians answer there, isn't it? [applause] kay: what is your question? >> do you not think that your brother would have done a better job? he was better qualified and better positioned. miliband: it will surprise you to know that my answer is no. [laughter] miliband: let me explain why. it was a difficult contest between me and david. why did i stand? i thought somebody could move us on from new labour because i thought that was the time that was necessary for the country and necessary for the party. and i had strong views about how we need to change the country. i think this country is unequal.

we've made mistakes like on iraq and immigration and we will come to that. i thought i was the best versa to move the party on. i stood because that is what i felt was the right thing for the country. i think i'm the right person for the job. i thought it did then and i think it now. kay: what regrets do you have about creating such division and a division in your family? miliband: it is hard. kay: in what way is it hard? miliband: it was bruising. it was bruising for may, more david. it has healed. it is healing. kay: so you did fall out? miliband: it was very difficult. kay: did you talk? miliband: it was strange. not surprisingly. i care deeply about this country. i believe i am the right person to be prime minister.

i thought it in 2010. i would not have gone through that if i did not have strong convictions. kay: your poor mum. miliband: she is a hearty soul. kay: hello to you and what is your question? just in the middle. >> do you think that it remains important for the party value and if so, why and how? miliband: yes is the answer because i believe in a fair and equal society. each generation of labour politicians put it into practice in their own generation. what does does that mean today? and it goes back to this question which is what i see in britain -- and this is something countries all around the world are grasping. are we going to be countries that work for the richest and

the most powerful, will we be the country where is everyone going to get a fair shot? is everyone going to play by the same rules? if you do the right thing. a lot of people are doubting that in britain. to the gentleman who asked me why i was gloomy, i think people are asking, why doesn't this country work for me anymore? i am doing everything people tell me to do. we need to make this country work for working people again. kay: what do you think? >> i think it needs to be revisited. it needs to be re-us him. kay: you have your hand up in the second row. can you wait for the microphone? >> how are you going to differ from the broken promises are you just going to sit here and

sugarcoat things or are you going to follow for the promise -- follow through on the promises? miliband: you will have to make a judgment tonight. i will keep my promises. let me go back to the tuition fees. in 2011, i said i wanted to miliband: to cut the tuition fee and then some people said it's the right thing to do but i'm also doing it for another agreement. it's so important. trust in politics is so important. i sometimes say, i want to be the first politician to under promise and over deliver. i will come back in five years if i'm prime minister and you tell me if i achieved it or not. these are promises i know i can keep. kay: interesting what politicians think about each other.

we asked matthew brown what he thought in our town hall debate. what do you think david cameron's best qualities are given that you have previously called in a chicken and a bully? miliband: i will say to think that i admire. the first is the commitment to equal marriage. it was hard in his party and it's the right thing to do for the country. [applause] and second this isn't going to the universally popular. the overseas development. he took a risk in the conservative party by saying this is the right thing to do. kay: would you have a pint with him? miliband: i don't know that we would have a pint. it is hard when we share --

maybe share a bacon sandwich or something. [laughter] miliband: it's hard when you are in politics because we are shouting questions and it's very edifying but if you said earlier , it is hard to avoid back and forth. kay: let's bring in jeffrey. >> your made it difficult for your supporters and four people undecided. miliband: not a great start. >> you don't seem to be fighting for the values that your party stands for. like the labor council because of the decimation of budgets. miliband: first of all total

austerity is happening because of the conservative government decisions. the councils with other government positions and they are very different from those. let me get to the other point of the question. i'm not going to win a contest of who looks best eating a bacon sandwich. >> they are shaking their heads at all sorts of things. can we get a microphone there. miliband: what i stand for and what matters in politics is ideas to change the country. when you have powerful opponents like the energy companies or the bank and rupert murdoch and decency, reaching out to people. >> i question is, everyone in this country remembers 13 years of the labour government under blair and brown. you talk about austerity but the reason there is austerity is because all of the money was spent, nothing was planned for

the rainy day and all you say it was it is a global economy and the global crisis. but the liberalization of the banks came from your party. what i want to know is if people are going to vote labour can you promise you you learned from the mistakes that led to the mess that we are now in? [applause] miliband: what is your name suir? let me be clear. we were wrong on the regulations. we got it wrong. the banks were under regulated. other people are regulating it even longer. i am sorry we got it wrong. we are going to learn from that. i believe i have learned from that in my five years of the leaders of the opposition. [applause] the banks will work but --

better for businesses. that goes back decades. kay: andy saying why is labor only nine and neck after five years of opposition going to the polls today, 279, 278. why? miliband: i take an old-fashioned the on this. let's let the people decide. we were coming out of the government in 2010. it's hard when you are a one-time opposition but i'm interested in the future of the country and the people and what to see what they decide on. kay: would you believe we're out of time? miliband: already? kay: 18 minutes gone. thank you very much. [applause] kay: not finished just yet though.

coming up miliband going head to head with jeremy paxton. state and. jeremy: this is cameron and miliband live. not to the labour leader ed miliband. do you think britain is full? miliband: because of immigration? jeremy: yes. i wouldn't describe it that way no. we have high levels of immigration and i think we do need to try to get the levels of migration down. but i will tell you one thing i am not going to make a false promise on this because david cameron did make that -- jeremy: you have false promises on immigration. your government. miliband: you've got it wrong.

they were wrong. you asked me a question. let me answer. i think that we benefit from our diversity. immigrants over the years haveneed proper controls. a labour government says we will do something else. mr. paxman: but we are talking about numbers. mr. miliband: i will not get into your hypotheticals. let's get migration down. mr. paxman: 75 million? 80 million? mr. miliband: