, because it was not tracked as closely, it is hard to parse. what we now think of as ptsd has existed since people began picking up weapons against other post civil war, half of those were in mental hospitals, people who thought -- fought in the civil war. you had that number during the civil war. in world war ii, you had half a million troops, half a million, discharged because of what were called psychiatric disorders. so these men of the greatest generation, half of them are because they just can't do it anymore. ptsd emerged from the and him. the issue is not new. the toll it takes is not --

emerged from vietnam. the issue is not new and the toll it takes is not new. deployments, without question, has driven it up. a narrow majority have not deployed, but there are units where all the guys have. so the men and women around them can say this is what you are going to face. this is what we faced. they are absorbing behaviors. prescription drug use is extraordinarily high. it is too high in the civilian world and it is too high in the military world. was in a base where the taliban and controlled amount jobs. they would show us the space they after day. there were 50 men at the base.

were taking prescription drugs. and they were not taking the dosages you or i would. they were taking multiples of what they should. so they would come back and one of two things would happen. either they would go cold turkey, and have suicidal thoughts skyrocket, or they would go down to a normal prescription, three xanax, not nine, one ambien, not six. the reliance on drugs is something that did not happen in previous wars the way it is happening now. i don't think we as a country have any sense of just how big the problem is. >> well, everybody, thank you again today for coming out in joining us for this important conversation. partnershave to think ate bill, yogi, and mark,

the american suicide prevention foundation we are working every day with volunteers all around our communities to prevent suicide. iraq andners like the acc afghanistan veterans of america, or enlists to speak out on the issue, and veterans, who i have a very fun love of at this point , working with afs pe, his wife, ,arol, your daughter, melanie that's for warriors and the important work you have done every day and continue to do to prevent suicide. every day is veterans day. doing work every day to ourent suicide among nations veterans and military

personnel. with partners like senator , up ony, the white house congress, on capitol hill, inside and outside government, we are going to get the job done. we will prevent suicide. thank you for coming out. have a wonderful day and a great veterans day tomorrow. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> one of the panelists we just heard from was bill rauch, a

veteran of afghanistan. he will be on washington journal tomorrow in an edition devoted to veterans day. we will look at mental health. plus, we take your phone calls, your tweets, your facebook comments. liveington journal" starts at 7:00 a.m. eastern, right here on c-span. >> c-span's veterans day coverage includes profile interviews with veteran members of congress. graduate whoarvard did four tours in iraq and served with general david petraeus. lessons ire a few learned in iraq and in the war. one of which is the value of leadership. it's amazing the impact that even some of the youngest people in our country can have on the

lives of others if you are willing to stand up and lead. when i made the difficult determination that the best way to prevent iran from a nuclear weapon was to , a lot ofe deal people advised me to step back. this is politically dangerous, a contentious issue with a lot of divisions. but i remembered that i was not elected to sit back and take the politically easy course. i was elected to lead. there and explained why i thought it was important. i talked to my constituents and explained to them, justified my position to hear their criticisms and complaints and answer their concerns. think -- there is a real

value in having the courage to come out and say what you believe. a bettere would be country and a stronger congress if we had more people just explain the truth to the american public, even if we know it might be unpopular back home. c-span'sn watch interviews with veteran members --congress who are veterans with freshmen members of congress who are veterans tomorrow starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern. eastern, president obama laying a wreath at the tomb of the unknown at arlington national cemetery, also live that c-span. louisiana u.s. senator david bitter and democratic state senator john bell edward meet tonight in the first debate of the runoff campaign of the louisiana governor's race. mr. edwards is trying to reverse

the trend in louisiana which has to elected a democrat statewide office in seven years. we will have the debate live tonight at 8:00 on c-span two. an intergovernmental organization whose membership includes all of the member countries of nato called on the u.s. to close the prison facility at guantanamo bay and to transfer, release, or prosecute the remaining prisoners. the "wall street journal" writes the detention of prisoners violates international standards and law. >> good morning. i would like to welcome me of year to this event, the press conference to present the report on the human rights situation of hastanamo detainees that

been produced by the office of democratic institutions and human rights. hereto prevented the findings are omar fisher, deputy head of human rights department, and lucille sanger, and advisor on has-terrorism issues who been involved in the production of the report from the very beginning. i hope you had an opportunity to pick up the press release on the way in. on your way out, the report, in hardcopy, will be available on the table used for sign in. after initial presentations, there will be time for questions from the media if such questions there are. with no further at do, i will hand the floor to omar fisher. mr. fisher: thank you. and thank you, everybody, for

being here today. tom mentioned, we all work at to the office of democratic institutions and human rights, the main human rights body of the organization for security in europe. as you may know, that is an international governmental organization. we work on security, the mocker sea, and human rights. , andve 57 -- democracy human rights. we have 57 participating states. the united states is one of them. you may have heard about us through our work in ukraine. our office is quite active there. but our mandate is to ensure human rights to the extent we can across the 57 states and to assist the states in meeting their commitments. monitorto do this is to

the implementation of these commitments. over the past years, we have engaged with u.s. authorities on guantanamo. we have followed developments there closely. we have repeatedly called to close the detention facility. the report we are presenting today is in some ways the culmination of these efforts. we think it is a fairly good discussions in the u.s. about the facility are ongoing, perhaps gaining momentum. the treatment of detainees and as -- theas well report details the treatment of detention as well as the ongoing process of closing guantanamo.

have had open discussions with u.s. authorities. we are very thankful for that. in some cases, these are frank discussions. certainly, we did not agree on everything. havingng we do regret is been unable to visit the guantanamo detention facility and interview in private the detainees held there. this is standard practice whenever carrying out human rights monitoring of detention facilities. but we were not able to do this. the report and its findings are based on conversations with u.s. officials. we did try to send, through lawyers, written questions to current guantanamo detainees. we only received replies from

one of them. his replies were redacted by the authorities when we received them. our fact-finding did suffer some limitations. that was largely of our own making. i would like to thank all of those who took the time to share the information they had for this report. i see some in the room today. thank you for that. will talk more in detail about the contents of the report. i would like to highlight some key recommendations. the first, obvious one, as i have artie mentioned, is to close guantanamo. is toeady mentioned, close guantanamo. this is a recommendation we have made many times. research provides plenty of evidence on why guantanamo should be closed and the detention of the detainees should end.

in this regard, we very much welcome the commitment made by the current administration to close the facility. there has been some slow progress, but there has been some progress. 112 detainees remain there. see the facility closed, but we do not want to see a solution that is not in compliance with human rights. one of the main problems with guantanamo is detention without trial. we would not like to see whereees moved somewhere they would still be detained indefinitely without trial. the cheney's should either be charged or released. should either be charged or released. facing criminal offenses, some are already facing proceedings. report, we have

identified a number of shortcomings in relation to the militaryy commissions. we would like to see it fully addressed. we acknowledge that the system has improved, both as a result of changes in legislation, but we think the best way to address these shortcomings is to assure receive a fair trial and to have the criminal offense prosecuted in civilian court. i should add that u.s. federal courts have a strong record of trying those suspected of serious offenses, including acts of terrorism. the final point i want to make his unaccountability. it is a major concern for us, , that the people

of guantanamo were subjected to ill treatment, in some cases, torture. this has been acknowledged by the president himself. we think it is crucial that those responsible for those acts are held accountable. in our conversation with u.s. officials, we have been given all assurances that those responsible for torture will be held accountable. case withpecially the those responsible for torture in the cia. those affected should have access to full redress. for example, compensation for .ny acts of torture .hese were the key messages

i would now like to give the floor to lucille for more details on the findings. lucille: thank you, omar. omar presented the methodology we followed when producing the reports. he also highlighted the main recommendations formatted in the report. explain in more detail some of our findings, which have informed the recommendations. give you an overview of those findings as obviously they are also explained and analyzed in more details in the report itself. like first to underline that our findings are based on international human rights standards and international humanitarian law to the extent it is applicable to the context of guantanamo. the first recommendation

concerns ouromar call for the closure of guantanamo and the end of indefinite detention. in that regard, let me highlight some facts. as of today, 100 12 detainees remain at guantanamo. 102 of them are did to without charge. a number of them have been kept 112 detainees-- remain at guantanamo. 102 of them are detained without charge. -- a number of detainees have been held for 13 years. broughtes have been against them. in addition, you have 53 guantanamo who have been cleared for transfer or release. this means the u.s. authorities consider that these individuals no longer pose a threat to u.s.

national security. the majority of those 53 detainees have been cleared for more than five years, but they remain in indefinite detention and it is uncertain when they will be released. such figures, such facts underlying the vast majority of detainees being kept in guantanamo without charges against them, and this is contrary to international standards. the transfer of detainees from guantanamo, the report does allege the increased pace of transfer at the end of 2014 and also this year. recent transfers also took place , and the administration has working toward

additional transfers of detainees by the end of the year. we welcome these efforts in the report, but we also call for further increased efforts in terms of detainees out of guantanamo. the current pace of transfer remains insufficient to significantly progress toward -- closure of the dissenting detention facility. , the reportansfer also underscores the obligation of the united states to ensure that detainees are not transferred to a country where they may be at risk of torture or ill-treatment. the u.s. has taken actions in , and in some cases, the detainees have ended up in third countries because in their own countries they could have ended up tortures.

-- tortured. however, we found the united states relied heavily on assurances when concluding transfers and in some cases forcibly transferred detainees to states allegedly practicing torture. this is in contradiction with the united states obligations under international law, and osc commitments. the swift closure of guantanamo. this means first that the indefinite detention of individuals kept in a detention facility without being charged should and -- end. those that have been charged should be tried. this is the second area of the

finding i would like to mention. our port emphasized -- our report emphasizes the fairness of the proceedings before the military commission. omar mentioned a number of improvements in the legislation and litigation, but we still have identified in the report and number of shortcomings regarding the proceedings before the military commissions. the military commissions, first a system that presents a number of flaws in impartiality. , both the previous and current u.s. administration have implied the guilt of the defendants, which is contrary to the presumption of innocence. , we recognize the

therity of the cases before commission, but it is unclear when the trial dates for those , whereasl start detainees have been kept for 13 years into tension. we also highlight in the report that the proceedings before the military commission lack the remoteue to location of the courtroom. thatderscore in the report the proceedings are not publicent to the character of proceedings is understood and international laws. another area of concern that we is theht in the report alleged violation of the confidentiality of the

relationship between detainees and their clients. restraints are placed upon lawyers ability to meet frequently with their clients. this is a violation of defendant's rights to privately and confidentially communicate with counsel. another finding in the report the defense, if not provided with the same --ources as the prosecution the defense is not provided with the same resources as the prosecution. also, the overclassification of information remains problematic in proceedings before the military commissions. the classification prevents the disclosure of evidence to the the disclosureo

of information regarding allegations of torture made by that have faced proceedings before the military commissions. , it is more than allegations. we know a number of detainees are facing proceedings who have been ill treated or tortured. standards are not as strict as in international law. it is still possible to have evidence of torture admissible in proceedings. second delay is another area of concern related to the prohibition of torture 40 second delay may

withhold used to information on the alleged mistreatment of detainees. , our on these findings conclusion is that the military commissions do not meet fair trial standards. we believe the individuals charged should be brought before ordinary courts, operating in line with international fair trial standards. final area of findings relates to the prohibition of torture and accountability. the report identifies a number of abusive conditions of detention and interrogation practices such as waterboarding, sleep deprivation, that were faced under the previous administration and under the cia

rendition program. these practices amounted to ill-treatment or torture. when it comes to the current conditions of detention, our also have concerns regarding the management of hunger strikes, for instance. we underline in the report that the decision to force-feed detainees is contrary to international standards. based on information we have , we also consider the amountsof force-feeding to ill-treatment and potentially to torture. allegations of torture at guantanamo and under the cia rendition program are serious. u.s. officials, including the president, acknowledged the use of torture in the guantanamo

context. program andendition in the detention and treatment of detainees at guantanamo. investigations have been conducted by u.s. authorities. however, our report highlights the investigation into abuses at guantanamo was not impartial and therefore not effective. regarding the cia rendition program, no u.s. official has ever been prosecuted for their involvement in the program. also underline in the report findings onease of the cia rendition program offers a new opportunity for the u.s. administration to consider opening an investigation into

the cia rendition program. there is an obligation for the united states to provide victims with red dress. , we know that cases of torture and human rights violations happened at guantanamo, but no detainee has received redress. there is no lawsuit seeking redress on the merits. it seems the right to redress is not even part of the debate, is in theegret also report. those were some of the main findings contained in the report. the report also provides further details and advice in that regard. i will be happy to answer potential questions. thank you. tom: thank you, lucille. as lucille mentioned, and myself

earlier, we do have time for questions from the media or anyone on the floor. raise your question if you have something to ask and we will have a microphone brought over. question, ask your please give your name and the media outlet for which you work. >> how hard did you try to person,w detainees in and can you talk through what 'se obama administration response was as to why you could to them?direct access omar: we did try, as we normally do. we would indicate our intention or desire to interview detainees. we do that officially through official communication.

that it was not possible, but we did not to really get a detailed explanation as to why it was not possible. that is the answer i can give you. i don't know and we were not provided a definition as to why. >> i am with a german newspaper. this is going to be speculative to a certain extent, but maybe not so much that you cannot answer at all. we are all waiting for more concrete proposals from the administration as to how it wants to proceed to close guantanamo. there are domestic politics issues you will probably not want to go into, but based on your discussions with

administration officials, what kind of hope do you see for a short-term solution that is at least going to be better than what you see, and to what extent do you think that what you ed -- the only real option being debated here is to anothertanamo place with a whole new set of legal issues, colorado or somewhere. what do you see as a solution, if not a perfect solution? we are very much what thed in seeing outcome of the discussion is. we know a plan on the closure of guantanamo has been promised and .ay be presented soon we are very much welcoming what

we know as a stated commitment to close the facility. the main point remains, what i mentioned earlier, that if is about moving detainees from one setting to a setting somewhere else, that will not be satisfactory. whether that would constitute an improvement, i think it is difficult to say. it would depend on potential conflict with lawyers anywhere other than guantanamo. presents certain problems and challenges because of its location, but i wouldn't focus so much on that. i would say indefinite detention

is bad no matter what, whether in when tana mo or anywhere else. guantanamo or anywhere else. >> did you receive any i indication from administration moveials that they want to to the criminal justice system, the ordinary court system, or dramatically expand the military system? did you receive any indications of that? discuss this. that is our recommendation, but that is a question better placed to the officials in the administration. for six german newspapers. i have two quick questions. you mentioned incidents like waterboarding and sleep that happened at guantanamo. this is the first time i have heard that waterboarding

happened at guantanamo. i spoke with the military and lawyers and the consensus was this only happened a black sites. was not sorry if i clear. that did happen, in deed, under the cia rendition program. guantanamo, or other places? lucille: we covered mainly developments related to the cia rendition program to the extent that they were linked to goingees that have been through this program to guantanamo. >> i'm just not sure because many of them -- blacke: there have been sites in canton imola as well. in our findings, we have not specified -- in guantanamo as well. in our findings, we have not specified whether it was black sites or guantanamo. to --so this could refer >> so this could refer to people who were waterboarded elsewhere

and then brought to guantanamo. it did not necessarily happen on the island. lucille: yes. >> a follow-up. cannot interview detainees is usually, supposedly, the geneva convention. is that the reason they gave to you or did they really say nothing at all? omar: they really did not provide an explanation. >> thank you. >> one question. are you expecting any kind of opposition within the political ranks of the united states in terms of your report, and what kind of authorities have you managed to speak with regarding your report? what level, i would say? omar: we did speak with various

department agencies involved, defense, justice. the level was pretty high in who we had access to and we were grateful for the openings in these conversations. onhad u.s. authorities guantanamo. when it comes to how this report will be used in the political course,n the u.s., of we understand that a views are very different across the political spectrum. our hope is that the report will be able to contribute, somehow, to the discussion in a way that would promote human rights, which is the main aim for us. >> thank you. click sputnik news. -- >> sputnik news. this has been going on, as you

said, since the previous you are noton, and able to get access to these sites, to these detainees. he referred to limitations in the senate intelligence report on the cia renditions. thatmakes you confident this report exposing these by u.s.abuses officials, including lawmakers currently opposing the transfer of detainees into the united states, opposing the closure of gitmo, what makes you confident that this will change perceptions were perhaps catalyze some sort of international action? omar: when it comes to our hopes

are how much we think the report is going to be influencing policy, indeed, many organizations have already of thed their view guantanamo situation. that many have talked about guantanamo, the human rights impact of guantanamo, and the discussion about closing guantanamo. used,port is going to be we hope, inside the u.s. it may be used in the political discussions with various political actors that have, as i mentioned, may have very different views. but we hope it can be used as a tool in those discussions. we also think it may be of use in their organizations own advocacy and efforts to the closure of

guantanamo and human rights solutions to that's. -- we are an international organization and the purpose of our report is to bring the international dimension to this discussion. our own body and we hope that a report like this will stimulate discussion at that level. are you talking about the u.s. state department? that is what i was also referring to, but this report might also be used out of state.

report comes to how this might be used by our partners at state, we hope there will be frank discussions. yesterday at the state , it was discussed, and we hope that the recommendations will be implemented. >> i think we have time for two or three more questions. >> if guantanamo is now closed by mr. obama's executive order, how happy would that make you? how would you define that decision?

>> we have been calling for the guantanamo, so we don't enter into a discussion of whether that should happen by executive order or otherwise. the important thing is the end result. it would make us happy. but as we mentioned before, we would not want to see detainees transferred to another indefinite detention setting. >> i want to go back to something you said about you questionnaire to one prisoner and you got back something heavily redacted. him?were you asking what percentage was redacted? and can you say anything about the content? sent questions to

detainees related to the conditions of their detention and the conditions of transfer to guantanamo. received one reply, which was fully redacted. with the exception of the title. , and that% redacted letter is part of the report. >> i am from slovakia. our country has adopted nine of the detainees in the recent three years. to what extent do you monitor the quality of their lives and

of thoseg conditions transferred to third countries? lucille: the report is primarily focused on the united states, but we do cover transfer to third countries. coverednot, however, the situation of detainees once they have been transferred to third countries, but we do note in the report to bet a number of other participating states have -- note in the report is that a number of other participating states having gauged the united have engagedo -- to united states also

welcome detainees. >> we have time for one more question if there is one. sure. [inaudible] omar: in short, with what i mentioned before, it's not the only thing that needs to happen. happen, but it should be accompanied by a number of that things to make sure all aspects of guantanamo are , reparation,

compensation, etc. of course, closing guantanamo is key. >> ok, we would like to thank you again for being here with us this morning for this presentation. , you will beut able to find full copies of the report. aside from that, we wish you a great day. day-span's veterans coverage includes profile interviews with freshmen members of congress who are veterans, including a republican representing oklahoma's fifth district. his unit was involved in the hunt for saddam hussein. battle, i think your faith plays a tremendous role. i have had to do some terrible .hings

processing that has been a long journey. you are on the front lines, carrying a rifle, bayonet, hand grenades, ammunition, water. -- basic uncle months implements. those organizations are the ones designed to find the enemy, not just react, but to find him. in my experience, we found a lot of enemies. i have had to watch friends get hit. i have had to take human life and fight my way out of ambitions. those experiences stay with you your entire life. but they are not insurmountable. i try to relate to people that

a horrible car wreck or some devastating storm or something traumatic, it would impact your life and largely shape it, but it doesn't mean you don't function. it means you take those experiences and shape your future experiences. that is the way my faith has helped me. clicks you can watch c-span interviews with freshmen members of congress who are also veterans starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern. next, a discussion of the future of the u.s. navy. this is part of a summit on national security issues hosted by defense one, a website for the defense industry. you can watch the entire summit

at c-span.org. this portion is half an hour. >> welcome back. we had a great morning. hopefully we will have just as informative and entertaining in afternoon. we have four sessions. how will the military prepare in the age of everything? a deputy from the navy will talk about what's going on in the fifth fleet. after that, we have a brigadier general who is the so, africa commander.

i think he will have a lot to say about operations there. we have heard a lot about special operations forces recently. then we go to the deputy director of the cia. there hasirst time been a new director in like 30 years. finally, to close the day, the deputy secretary himself who we all know and love. let's get it started right now with the vice admiral. enjoy the rest of the afternoon, everyone, and thank you.

brad peniston: thank you for joining us. we appreciate you coming to talk to us. this really has been the age of everything. china is more active in the south china sea. there is chinese navy around the world, drugs in the caribbean, insurgence in yemen. what is changing fastest, and how is the navy trying to meet those challenges? >> thank you for the question and think you for inviting me. i am happy to be here with so many members of the community and to tell you about what the navy is doing today in how we are facing the challenges that you mentioned. me to were to ask prioritize, i am not sure i could. tell you is that from a navy perspective, we took

a good, hard look at the security challenge that exists across the globe. our strategysed for the 21st century in march. we took a hard look at all the things you mentioned. the strategy outlines three key points that i think focus our efforts. one, we are deployed forward. responseis your crisis force. we are forward each and every day. today, about 40,000 young men and women are deployed on the tip of the spear, ready to do a number of things, from humanitarian assistance when conflict, toerring to crisis. being forward is something we do

every day. second, our friends, allies, and partners are critical to what we do. and we know we are better together. work with friends, allies, partners all the time. while we cannot have all of our forces deployed each and every surge capability that is primed to surge if called upon in a crisis. so i guess what i would tell you is we are forward, we are engaged, we are ready. brad peniston: the cbo recently came out with a report that said it's not going to get to 308

fast as planned. before the recent resurgence of russia, some had said to that we were really entering or maybe an age of power and competition at sea. vice admiral aquilino: as we threatsa strategy, the and things we would have to respond to our clearly part of the calculus. our most recent force structure analysis identifies that we need greater than 300 ships, 11 aircraft carriers, 33 amphibious more to execute missions. those are the big moving pieces. that keeps us present around the globe in order to do the missions we talked about.

currently, we have five carrier strike groups that are either deployed or trained and preparing to deploy today. roosevelt is returning from a greater than eight month deployment. they currently just executed a mission with the indians and the japanese. we have one east coast and one west coast group getting ready to deploy. we have the uss ronald reagan that just departed parted correia and is doing a western departedperation -- a westernis doing pacific operation. i believe we will meet the by geopolitical commanders as identified. brad peniston: does that take

into account russia's resurgence? vice admiral aquilino: it takes into account all that we would have to respond to. take any day of the week and you might find one of those threats being higher prioritized than the other. in response and what we are doing together with nato, which would go directly to your russia question, last week we executed some ballistic missile defense exercise of vents with our nato partners and allies. ballistic missile defense ships in spain in order to meet the threats you described. abouteniston: let's talk forward basing elsewhere in the world. there are a couple of ways to get more forward deployed days out of a given ship. you can rotate crews. you can make sure they are ready navy hasd i know the

initiatives in all three of these areas. more to make do sure our ships go as far as they can? vice admiral aquilino: our current view of how we operate forward is based on two different models, some of it being forward and late facing. the example there is forward applied naval forces. we have a group of ships that operate out of japan. we also have rotational deployments. those leave from whatever base they are currently at and i think the comment i would make to you is, in viewing it in regard to our need, desire, and attend -- intent to be forward deployed, it is not about bases, it being where it matters when it matters. brad peniston: understood, but there are different ways to get where it matters when it matters. i wonder what the navy might be

thinking about doing differently. vice admiral aquilino: we have executed the president's task to the pacific. it's one of the initiatives we have taken on. we currently have almost 60% of our naval forces deployed. 58 is the latest number. we will get to 60% by 2020. , it's our just things most capable things, so our most advanced teams are out there. our most advanced ships are out there. again, it's not just about things. the rebalance is more than just things. it's about partnerships. it's about how we think about , and critical is the

fact that we are aligned with each and every one of the nations out there in order to build a network of navies that support those in favor of the brad: i realize that the national balance is a decision to make. and yet you say the navy is responsible for making sure you can respond to whatever request s come up. a lot more stuff is happening in europe and a lot more is going on in the middle east, not to mention the caribbean and other places -- the arctic. how do you make sure you have what it takes to get into these places that are not the pacific, even as you try to execute that overall strategy? >> forces are balanced over

responsibility. to the point of 30 ships in the middle east supporting the events going on there. somewhat less than that, but again, i highlighted the ballistic missile defense ships. one just left through the mediterranean. we are supporting each of the global combatant commanders as required, and we are meeting their needs. we are also mobile. those forces can shift as required depending on where and when the crisis might be. instances, from a navy perspective, i have deployed in a and idea where i was going to go to one place and ended up in another. it is one of the benefits the navy provides. while we are not tied to bases, we do not need access granted by any nation. we bring our own logistics. we can come and go and operate anywhere we need to to support the tasking.

>> that's what the navy does. and the united states navy has roger up for all sorts of things it did not intend to and carried that out. you are executing a new optimized fleet or response plan -- optimized fleet response plan that is trying to synchronize all of the various bits that need to happen to get to a fully functional, powerful navy out there. what are the challenges you face? what keeps you awake? what are you working through to make sure this happens? >> i just work for admiral swift. he made a comment that i agree with, which is, really, nothing keeps me awake. i sleep just fine. for many reasons. number one is knowing that i am part of the greatest navy in existence ever through time. the optimized fleet response plan was designed to get at one of our three pillars of being ready. so for us to have a sustainable,

model that provides the high end trained capability that is needed against today's threats, that is why we developed the optimized fleet response plan. as part with an admiral of the development of this. he was kind of the mastermind. what it did was it took a variety of different inputs, synchronized and focused to produce a completely sustainable, affordable force that can deploy to execute that high-end mission, so it took into account those hard things with maintaining our ships to keep them ready to go to see. it took into account our ability to train our amazing sailors to the high-end fight they would have to do.

it synchronized parts, aircraft, the sustainment of those aircraft, the ordinance required to do the fight. when you take all of those things, it was eye-opening and a challenge. but the team got us to a good place. brad: the navy announced that this last year and it has been going for about one year. how is it going? it was first announced that it was going to be in 2017 and we are on track. i am not going to tell you we have all of the answers. we are smart enough to learn that we have probably gotten most of it right, but we are agile and flexible enough to understand that for those things that might need some tweaking or adjusting, we are ready to do

that. if you take the maintenance community and figure out how to take the entire navy group of shifts and align the csg with the cruiser, destroyer ships, you have to align people's, p8's p8's, submarines. it is a fairly large task. the first deployment will be in brad: i am envisioning the 2017. world's largest spreadsheet. >> we call it the mop. brad: what comes of things are you figuring out? >> i do not know if right now we are figuring out anything. we are going to see what might need a little more focus, more tweak. again, getting back to the goal when we take on the task of being ready to support the nation's tasking, there is no better way to do it.

with regard to lessons learned, those will come out. we meet monthly on the status. the different communities brief two of the fleet commanders, the status of their strike groups, any cc outfits, and we will continue to make adjustments to produce the most affordable, sustainable, efficient, and effective fighting force we can. brad: how do you know when this has succeeded? our ships better equipped? did they stay on the station longer because you are not fixing stuff? what is the ultimate measure of this plan? guest: i think the metric is, wendy schedule -- when the schedule is built, when you go out on time, when you come out on time, when you deploy ready to execute the high-end from from humanitarian

assistance to deterring aggression no matter where we go, to responding to crisis, and ultimately evading a high-end adversary at task, that is the ultimate goal. brad: let's go back to what we're talking about earlier. international partnerships -- we have not talked about the navy for years now, but i still think it is important. international partnerships are as important as ever if not more so. what are the main areas changing in that from what you said? who is really coming along, and who does the navy want to bring along a little more? the gullible network of navies is the term. this see a no has highlighted cnoimportance -- ithe

has highlighted the importance of relationships with our partners. to be able to enhance the economic portions that go on in the world as the protector of the sea line of communications. again, i don't think we have a rack and stack of one better than the other. we operate across the globe. like i said, we just did a large exercise in india. we work with our nato partners each and every day. we have done some ballistic missile events in the north atlantic recently. we have the george washington carrier right now, just finished completing a transit of the straits of magellan. it is executing operation unito ss with our southern american partners. delighted i am sure they

to have an aircraft carrier. guest: they certainly are. we were delighted to do that. it does not matter which nations , we are better when we are together, when we are interoperable, and when we can all contribute to the global security of the maritime aor. brad: and let's talk about the navy marine corps team. they operate closer together the an any other service. there are interesting things you are doing to help improve that. what is new and what is next for the blue-green fowlkes? we have never been anything but extremely close. what you will find is it is tri-signed. it is signed by the sea and no -- cno, the commandant, and it

is signed by the commandant of the coast guard. the maritime services in this day and age are more together than ever. specifically with the marine corps, we have a variety of events where we synchronize ability and work on our to operate forward together more effectively. that is called a naval board. the naval board is a monthly event that i host with cochair general walsh, and we bring to that event the critical concerns and tasks that the commandant and the cno want is to get after. again, to increase war fighting capability, to increase our engagement with international partners, and additionally, to ensure the navy marine corps team is ready to go ahead into the 21st century. brad: can you talk about specifics? guest: there's plenty of things.

regard toevents with enhancing and improving our war fighting events, with regard to anti-access area denial challenges. as you know, that is a threat that seems to be increasing across the globe. the navy marine corps team is working on a variety of events in order to enhance our capabilities. brad: let's talk about that. there has been an awful lot of talk about a qad, as you know. it is a big problem in the pacific. china is rapidly developing its own military, obviously. but even elsewhere, where there are air defenses. there are always the good old naval mine. there are ways our enemies can keep naval forces away from the fight. it has been noted that this is itself a kind of asymmetry. you take the mine.

it cost $1000 to put a mine in the water, they can keep a billion-dollar fleet way away from the harbor. is there anything the u.s. navy can bring to this problem? guest: absolutely. with regard to the anti-access area denial threats, they are not new. our strategy has identified them as a key component and a challenge that we have taken on and will overcome. the ability for the navy-marine corps team to execute sea control, that is go into a time and place of our choosing is critical to how we do our business. the marines are going to be the first to bring online the jsf. the navy will not be far behind them. that capability is critical to our ability to get into and

access and execute our mission inside our access-denied area. brad: because of the stalinists? guest: that is a critical component. our ability to execute electromagnetic maneuver warfare is a critical component. and there are vast amounts of things we train and execute to in order to defeat that type of threat. brad: you mentioned in the electromagnetic spectrum. we will have the most sophisticated jamming platform as opposed to our electromagnetic action platform. as opposed to just a dumb bomb truck. what is the plan for starting to exploit that? to learn how you fight that and use it in your battle plans? guest: you mentioned what is going on in the naval board, that is one of the topics. team is working

together to determine how best to employ. we are building concepts of employment and operations. the marine corps will lead because they will deploy their gsf version at first. but the navy is completely plugged in and working to understand the naval employment of that asset. to tryo the marines get it out first and you get to watch how they do it. guest: we have worked with them before, at our weapon schools and at our training basis. the teams are working together to understand how it best supports the fight that exist. -- that exists in the area. how to best synchronize the effects from a marine corps standpoint, from a navy standpoint, and ultimately how the two teams work together to defeat this anti-access area denial threat. brad: we talked about china a little bit.

the headlines have been filled with the south china sea. obviously, that is one of the most contested areas in the maritime domain in the world. there is larger stuff going on. the u.s. has begun freedom of navigation patrols. china has in response sent armed jets through the area. this is not the only place in the world that is so contested. from where you sit, what is your team doing to think about how you approach this kind of problem? guest: i don't think this kind of problem is very much different from what we do each and every day. our forward presence and global deployment plan, we execute these operations each and every day. not just in the west pacific, mediterranean, north atlantic, south america, so i do not think we view it as a singular problem. we view it's really as standard normal operations. the secretary of defense said it

best when he said, we the navy will operate anywhere we desire within the international norm , standards, rules, and laws. that theme is nothing different than we have been doing for a number of years. brad: how about this. this is something unprecedented. climate change. , extreme rising seas weather events, all sorts of projections and predictions about how this is going to cause unrest. from where you sit, what are you thinking about? issue the climate change is not something that recently showed up on our radar scope. navy is taking a lead. it is built in as a part of our strategy. believe that the arctic area will open up over the next few

years. and we are not waiting for that. we are doing operations every day to become familiar with and be able to operate unimpeded in the arctic when the time comes. we have developed, out of my office, and my predecessor built its, the arctic roadmap. we do things in the arctic frequently, not long ago the uss surfaced at the north pole. we have executed operation ice x in the not-to-distant past. we swapped with our nato partners to work navigation strategies. and we have u.s. sailors on a couple of foreign ships am a familiarizing ourselves with the area that they operate probably more frequently than us. and we will be ready for the arctic challenge. see only our operations increasing over the next five years there.

: closer to home, congress and the president have concluded a budget deal. it seems that it is bound to give more stability to the military budget, as well navy budget. what does that do for you? i think that stability is the critical part we are looking for. i would argue the other services. the unknowns really make it hard to build a plan that is consistent. it just impinges on getting to execute the strategy we talked about. if you have done all the ships,s to get all our any time the budget impacts our ability to stay on path just makes it more challenging. the good thing is, i don't have to touch the budget in my job.

my friend joe has to do that, and he does a tremendous job. but it impacts operations and other things when that uncertainty reduces what is required to execute the strategy. brad: the world is going to produce enough uncertainty for everybody coming up. of the things you can foresee, the challenges, over the next year, what are you going to be thinking about? what are the big things you have to grapple with? guest: i think it is to keep us focused. i think the plan that we build is on target. there will be a lot of pop-up things across the growth -- across the globe, bright, shiny objects that will get your attention. i think the plan for us is to remain a forward deployed naval force and not get held back and garrisons. as the nation's crisis response force, we have to keep the eye on the ball. the president still asks, when

a crisis occurs, where is the nearest aircraft carrier? that is our role, that is what we do. we have to keep allied with our nato partners and friends across the globe, and we have to have surge capacity, should crisis break out. if we keep that up, we will be in a good place. brad: i think that will do it for us. admiral, thank you very much for joining us. guest: thanks for having me. [applause] ♪ c-span has a full lineup of veterans day programming for you. join us tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. former first lady barbara -- laura bush and thomas perez on aligning our heroes. by thersation organized chamber of commerce and the george w. bush institute. on wednesday, c-span's washington journal from 7:00

a.m. to 10:00 a.m. eastern, with the latest on veterans issues and your input. at 10 a.m. -- 10:00 a.m. eastern, conversations with members of congress, beginning with seth bolden, a former marine, and steve russell, a former army ranger whose unit helped hunt down saddam hussein. at 11:00 a.m. eastern, live coverage of the veterans day replaying ceremony at arlington national cemetery. and at noon, more from freshmen members of congress. representative ryan zinke he talks about his experience in iraq is a former native seal, -- watch our coverage on tv and online on c-span.org. british secretary philip hammond is in washington dc. he held a conference with secretary of state john kerry

yesterday. today he talked about what he calls a conservative approach to climate change, saying debate has been dominated by the left. from the american enterprise institute, this is about 40 minutes. good morning, ladies and gentlemen. i am the president of the american enterprise institute. i am honored to be with philip hammond of the u.k. foreign minister am a for his speech on energy and climate policy. a few quick words about our guest, mr. hammond is the secretary of state for commonwealth affairs. a conservative member of parliament in 1997 and has served as the secretary of state for transport and security. career, he political has had a business career in small and medium-sized countries. -- companies. we are delighted to hear his remarks about conservative approaches on how we can understand the climate and energy situation. we are also honored to have with

us the british ambassador to the united states. with this, we welcome our friend from the u.k., the honorable philip hammond. [applause] sec. hammond: thank you very much for that kind introduction. i am delighted to be here at the american enterprise institute. you are rightly regarded as one of the most influential think tanks. the work that you do has a real impact. papers become policy and republican and democratic administrations. i also welcome the board members here today. the fact that so many influential and busy individuals regularly take time to come here speakers, but scholars, is a testament to your reputation for high quality and work. i have not come here bites --

come here by chance, but by choice, because i want to make an argument to a conservative audience. first, it is consistent with conservative values to tackle the challenge with climate change. and second, those conservative values can show us how best to deal with that challenge. as i said in my speech in boston, for too long we have about climatebate change to be dominated by purists and idealists, many of whom operate on the left of the political spectrum. who actively promote the notion that they and only day of the answers to the climate challenge, and that we have to sacrifice economic road and prosperity in order to meet it. i reject those arguments. i reject them because wanting to protect the world we inherit, to pass it on in tact to the next generation, is a fundamentally conservative instinct. as long ago as 1988, former

conservative prime minister margaret thatcher said, and i quote, the last thing we want is to leave environmental debts for children to pay up. no generation has a freehold on this earth. only have is a like tendency with a full repairing lease. unquote. i reject those arguments secondly, because i do not accept that we have to choose between our future prosperity and safeguarding the future of our planet. this is not a zero-sum game. as conservatives, we choose both. the starting point for any discussion on climate change must be the threat. 100%urse, no one is certain of every aspect of the science, and no one is 100% certain of the precise effects of man's activity on our climate. of the evidence in favor

taking action to curb carbon emissions has been steadily mounting for decades. uncertainty about the exact effects of climate change, or the role of man's activity in delivering it, is not an excuse for inaction. in every other facet of life, we assess the risks, and where the risk of recurrence is high and the impacts are potentially catastrophic am a we act -- catastrophic, we act to mitigate and defend. our approach to climate change should be no different. that is the precautionary approach that president reagan took decades ago when the world faced a similar challenge. in the 1980's, the majority of the world's scientists were deeply concerned about the environment. in that case, about the depletion of the ozone layer. there were some doubters, but president concluded that the risks of doing nothing were two great. it was a core part of his conservative principles to take bold action when necessary.

he displayed leadership, galvanizing business and the international community to agree to what became the montreal protocol, to phase out the use cfcs.aging csc's -- president reagan considered it an achievement, and he was right to do so. we now know that the scientists are right, as a result of the protocol, the ozone layer is now recovering. ofecognize the concerns those who worry that the cost of tackling climate change will prove too great. that the attempt to do so might ruin our economy. this is reasonable. and if you're really was a choice -- if it's really was a choice, between economic growth on one hand and reducing greenhouse gases on the other, then i too would because this, but i should argue that it is not. -- should be cautious, but i argue that it is not.

the cost of doing nothing is not nothing. ago, the u.k.e government commissioned a review by one of our leading economists to ask what the costs of doing nothing might be. that review estimated that it could be equivalent to losing 20% of global consumption. as our knowledge has developed, we have come to see that this is not only an underestimate, but also a narrow way of looking at the problem. many of the losses caused by climate change could be irreversible, regardless of our resources. unchecked climate change, even under the most likely scenario, could have catastrophic consequences of rising global temperatures, similar to the differences between the lice -- between the last ice age and today, leading to rising sea levels, huge movements of people fueling conflict and instability, pressure on resources, and a multitude of risks to global public health.

the worst case is even more severe, a drastic change in our environment that could see stresses in some areas that passed the limits of human tolerance, leading us the legacy of our generation and unimaginably different and dangerous world. the costs of doing nothing are potentially catastrophic, beyond anything that can easily be quantified in economic terms. but even that argument would be vulnerable if the immediate cost of taking the necessary actions was economic ruin us. what we need to consider is, what really are the costs of taking action? we need to be honest. we should not pretend that acting does not involve hard choices. the economy as a whole has more to gain and lose from an -- more to gain than to agenda,m embracing the

there will be losses. some sectors are in for a difficult time, and we will need to think carefully on how we impact -- manage the impact on communities that have relied on these industries for generations. their contributions to our economies have been great, and we should not abandon them now. however, more -- the more we learn, the more the evidence is shifting in favor of action, because that evidence is showing that the measures to reduce climate risk will stimulate economic growth. our experience in the u.k. bears this out. we have already reduced our emissions by more than 1/4 since 1990. our economy has grown by more than 60%. just last year, we writers -- we registered a reduction of carbon in our economy by more than 10%, the steepest drop by any country

in the last six years. at the same time, we have the fastest economic growth rate in the g7. not only that, but the growth in the low carbon sector of the u.k. economy is now outpacing the growth rate of the economy as a whole. in the u.k., firms engaged in low carbon goods and services, employed over 460,000 people, and contributed over 45 million pounds to the u.k. economy -- 45 billion pounds to the u.k. economy in 2013. the global trends are in the same direction. the global low carbon economy is already worth 6 trillion u.s. dollars and is growing between four and -- 4% and 5% a year. in 2014, and additions to the world's energy generating capacity increased dose for the the fossilhose of fuel capacity for the first time ever.

the price of the renewable generation is falling fast. the price of solar panels has fallen 80% since 2008, and the price of wind turbines has fallen more than 1/4 since 2009. this is allowing these energy sources to compete on cost with fossil fuel power generation without the need for subsidy. our businesses in the u.k. are looking at these trends and telling us that we should be a leader, not a back marker, that we should be at the forefront of these developments, taking advantage of the opportunities. final argument against tackling climate change that i want to address today is the argument that if we take action, it will put us at a disadvantage to competitors who don't. again, this is a perfectly reasonable concern. but with countries representing -- of the world's omissions emissions, signed up to national

contribution targets, the reality is that all single competitors are headed in the same direction. but in any case, the uk's experience so far is that a robust climate policy, even during a. -- during a period what others have been uncommitted has had no a noticeable impact on our competitiveness. businesses remain attractive to the u.k.'s openness to investment, flexible labor markets, and skilled workforce. in fact, it is increasingly clear that the economy of the future will be a low carbon economy. studies suggest that by stimulating greater innovation and efficiency, climate policies will increase our economic competitiveness. two weeks ago, i was in the united arab emirates giving a speech on climate change. they have the world's seventh largest reserves of gas and oil. despite this, they are already

planning for a future without micro carbons. they are investing in some of the world's largest solar power plants and are at the forefront of innovation and technologies such as higher efficiency solar power. that is not only happening in the middle east. china is now the world's leading investor in renewable energy. alone, itt five years will add more wind power than the entire generating capacity from all sources of the u.k. china has efficiency standards for its vehicles similar to those of europe and america. and it is increasingly planning its cities to be low carbon and resource-efficient. seven regions of china are already putting a price on carbon, and in another two years, this will spread to cover the whole of the country. movingary, the world is

towards a low carbon economy. i would suggest that there may in being lesssk defined than there is in taking the lead. the threat is great and the costs of dealing with it are now manageable, but the question how best to respond to the challenge. what are the appropriate mechanisms? what are the conservative solutions? how best can we tackle the principal cause of climate change, carbon emissions? of course, there are those on the left to have seen the need for action on climate change as a justification for large-scale mobilization, for a regulatory bonanza in a bigger state. purely regulatory approach was the answer, i have no doubt that economic growth would suffer. that it isn't. -- but it isn't.

the answer is to harness the power of the marketplace, to let the hidden hand of market forces loose on the challenge we are facing, and watch it deliver it has delivered solutions to every other problem we have faced and resolved in our history. we should be well placed in this regard. free markets have shaped both our countries. new york and london host the stocks two most important exchanges. london, new york, and chicago the most important commodity exchanges. confidence in markets that drives the approach to the economics of climate change. in the u.k., we placed a price on carbon. this is in line with conservative values. a carbon price corrects a market failure. but we have allowed co2 emissions to be a free good to

the polluter, even though they impose costs on society. with any other waste, we pay for it to be taken away. we do not let people just dump it on the street. moreover, a target solution is simple and gives business the certainty that they are asking for. alongside 70 governments, over 1000 businesses signed the declaration calling for carbon pricing last year. rather than waiting for government, many businesses are taking matters into their own hands by bringing in an internal carbon price to guide their investment decisions. a number of multinational businesses -- the number of businesses taking this approach has tripled over the past 12 months. even oil companies, including bp and shell, have come out in favor of carbon pricing. major u.s. companies who are already using major carbon pricing, or intend to introduce

it am a include google, microsoft, american express, coca-cola, monsanto, walmart, and yahoo!. to aundamental market-based approach is letting our entrepreneurs and innovators show the way. your organization is dedicated to preserving and strengthening the foundations of a free society, including competitive private enterprise. i agree wholeheartedly with that . far too often, this -- business is cast in the role of villain when it comes to climate change, i ams margaret thatcher -- british, so i keep clothing margaret thatcher -- [laughter] sec. hammond: as margaret thatcher said in 1989, we must resist the simplest it to nancy to blame -- simplistic to nancy to blame industry for the damage to blame industry for the

damage that has been done. again, the u.s. and u.k. are well-placed to lead. we have some of the most innovative businesses and our entrepreneurs are already leading the way. firms built u.k. more formula one racing cars than any other country. and they are pushing the boundaries of technology to harness the injury from liking -- from breaking. tesla is leading the world in developing battery technology for cars, and increasingly for homes too, giving them independence from the grid and moving us closer to the time where renewable generation is matched by storage to give around-the-clock access to renewable power. we have the best research institutions in the world. if you look at the list of the top universities in the world, you will find that last year all of the top 10 were either

british or american. we think that the split between the u.k. nus is reasonable given that your population is five times ours. [laughter] sec. hammond: the u.k. leads the world in wind energy. we have installed more capacity than any other country, and this is creating jobs for firms that use their products and services. meanwhile, companies such as google are developing the data capabilities which will allow supply and demand for energy to be matched more intelligently, reducing waste and cost. countriesthat our need to accelerate the pace of innovation in all of these technologies. in particular, we should focus the critical front of large-scale high-efficiency energy stores -- energy storage, giving us the prospect of cost-effective energy storage through the seasons. if our innovators and cannot --

our innovators and entrepreneurs confront this challenge and bring the cost of storage below the cost of fossil fuel-power generation, then the need for intervention will have passed, and we can step back and lead the market -- leave the market to do the rest. renewables will become the energy of choice. clean, competitive, and secure. if we take all of this action, we will reduce the cost of energy and the risks of climate change. we will create jobs and enhance our energy security. if britain and the u.s. move ahead, we can reap the rewards, but of course we cannot solve climate change alone. only effective global action will achieve that. that is why the international community is negotiating right now and what i hope all be a strong, effective, and binding deal at the paris meeting next

month. the paris deal is important because it will give all countries confidence in the direction of travel. it will level the playing field, confirm once and for all that climate action does not create competitive disadvantage. capitalized investment and spur innovation. countries have arty made -- have already made commitments to reduce their emissions over time. it is likely that every significant country will have done so by the end of this year. these are not just rhetorical commitments. many include strong elements, such as china's commitment to clean energy sources to make up 1/5 of its energy consumption by 2030. independent analysis estimates but -- estimates that this commitment could give china a renewable energy capacity of 1000 gigawatts by 2030,

equivalent to the yunnan states generating capacity today -- the united states' generating capacity today. this will expand economies of scale and expand technological innovation. our history shows that when the u.s. and u.k. take a lead, we can persuade the world to follow. we must take that lead. ourugh our innovation, trust in markets, and her leadership on the world stage, we can show the world how to counter the threat of climate change at the same time as growing our economy's. -- ecnomies. as conservatives, we know the responsible thing to do is tackle threats only see them, and do so in ways that preserve our future security and prosperity. smart thing to do is harness the power of the markets to tackle the challenges of climate change.

because if we do not lead, others will decide the way forward. their solutions may not be conservative ones. but if we do take the lead, we can ensure that global response markets,d on technology, and the institutions of capitalism. to get there, leadership is required. not just that of government, ,hink tanks, academia businesses all have a critical role to play. aei, the policies you promote, all of this will determine where and how we address climate change. taking action to combat climate change is the right thing to do, the conservative thing to do. we have the power to ensure that as the world embraces the challenge, it does so by

harnessing the power of markets and institutions of capitalism, the very things that have delivered for us time and time again throughout history. i look forward to working with you to seize this opportunity. thank you. [applause] host: thank you so much. what an honor it is to have you here. thank you for your remarks about this incredibly important issue.

i am going to moderate a question and answer period with the audience. i am not going to take the prerogative much myself, except for one question. i would like to get your -- i would like for you to get your questions in your mind, and i will call on you. but i would like to start with a question of particular concern for a lot of people in this audience. since we were children in the united states, we have seen an improvement in the environment. i grew up on the west coast, spent a lot of time in los angeles. it is remarkably better than it was. there is a cost for that, but americans and people around the world have decided to have a cleaner environment and have paid for that. we have seen what a better world it is. but when we look at the rest of the world, it is not always the same case. i want a cleaner environment personally, but the number one issue for me personally is rural poverty. i have spent a lot of time

outside the united states in poor communities. i came back over the weekend from india where i was shooting a film and a slum in mumbai. when i was there, i was working with and talking to people who recycle plastic. a take plastic water bottles and turn them into other products by melting down. one of the people i was with told me an interesting story. all waterme bags of bottles that and pieces of plastic in them. he said, what's that? i said, it's trash. he said, no, that's wrong, it is opportunity. it, turn it into another product, and it goes back into your house. i said, that's fantastic. that is the most conservative thing ever. i said, what's the problem? he says, the problem is that your country wants to shut us down. i said, what do you mean? he said, there is smoke that

comes out of here. and there is pressure on the indian government to shut down this entire industry and thus shut down the dreams of these people, who are dirt poor. they were dying of starvation under socialism, and now for the first time they are being set free. i share your views that we need a cleaner environment. who do i tell the poor man is simply trying to make a living and feet is family? his family? is there a solution for this when the largest carbon producers in the world are coming from china and india, where people are trying not to be poor? sec. hammond: we have to recognize that there is a conundrum,ere, a that some of the countries that are most vulnerable to climate change, that will actually suffer the most if there is catastrophic climate change, are those poorest countries. if we have catastrophic climate large, heat stress making

parts of the world uninhabitable, rising sea richs, we will not be a country that suffers. we will be able to invest in the protections we need to survive those things. it will be the poorest, least capable countries that will suffer the most. i am not an expert on recycling of plastic, but i am pretty sure that the answer to your question is that there are ways of her plastic bottles. we do it all the time -- there are ways of recycling plastic bottles. withthat are consistent climate goals. to create an industry that can respond to that, that probably means that your guys in mumbai will become creators and merchants selling on their mashed up plastic bottles to a processor, who will process them

in a higher technology plans than they would ever afford. it does not mean they are out of business, it just means that their business is changing. the real change or, whether we are talking about a develop economy or developing economy, is looking for a single factor. -- theake the u.s. temptation to focus on the importance of the coal industry and the impact on the coal industry of delivering carbon reduction targets. that is the wrong starting point. we have to look at the cost and benefits to the whole economy. get across this morning is looked at on a whole economy basis, the opportunities to drive economic growth from embracing these new technologies, allow us to mitigate the impacts on those who suffer loss and negative effect as older industries, polluting industries, are negatively impacted by this

change. the question for me is, looking at the economy as a whole, is the impact positive or negative overall? how do you manage the allocation of those impacts between different sectors, different groups, different individuals, is a challenge for governments and markets of getting the structures right. i think we can do that, provided the overall impact is positive. guest: recently i was -- host: recently i was speaking to a supporter of aei who works in the fossil fuel industry. i asked about the questions you raised. he was as concerned about -- asy in this room concerned about it as anybody in this room. i said, what is the answer? he gave me an example of the wrong way of going about it, which is to say to create

winners and losers where we don't have perfect information and science. he gave me the example of ethanol, where we grow food and burn it. but we have to subsidize it a lot, and it turns out a higher carbon footprint, and drives up food prices, which hurts the poor. i said, what's your point? he says, the point is, if we take off all those taxes, subsidies, and regulatory environment that distorts prices for fuel, then the highest benefit, lowest cost methods , and withinorward 20 years we would have a lower carbon environment. is this correct or simply high in the sky thinking? sec. hammond: i think there are a number of different arguments mixed up together. i mentioned the issue of market failure around the ability to dump pollution without charge.

cost imposed on the firm or individual, then his haters do not -- then his behaviors do not reflect the social costs. 30 or 40 years ago, we regarded it as normal to dump into rivers the waste from industrial production. we would not regard that is acceptable our normal now. someone to make a cost benefit analysis that is distorted by only viewing their private costs and benefits and not the broader ones they impose on society. having a precedent -- a pricing mechanism that reflects all aspects of activity is final. -- is vitally important. when i am arguing is that if we road offurther down the technological development that we are currently on, we are

getting to the point where many of these technologies will not need special regimes, protections, subsidies. the technology itself will have developed to the point where unit costs are competitive with fossil fuel. it -- solar power is already competitive with fossil fuels. not just in the sahara desert, but in most parts of the world. the next challenge is being able to store it, because clearly solar power is only available in certain parts of the day. if we can crack the challenge, and this is a technological challenge, is it as difficult as putting a man on the moon? i don't think so. but cracking the challenge of being able to store energy around the clock will give us solar power as a market competitive form of energy in vast parts of the world.

it will allow countries, those in the equatorial locations in particular, to export clean energy in the future and the way that they export oil and gas. it will give them a source of income that could be significant for the development. we fosteron is how and encourage that next step of innovation. it should be market-led, but there will be a need for short-term interventions to stimulate the market in the right direction. guest: i am going to turn it over to the audience now. i would like to hear what is on your mind. house rules -- wait for the microphone, say your name, and put your protest statement in the form of a question. [laughter] guest: john, do you have one? we are running slightly short. one or two questions, and we

will have shorter answers. we will start here. guest: good morning. as conservatives, we tend to value the proven and trusted. i heard no discussion of nuclear energy in your talk. it looks like europe is walking away from it. is that true? sec. hammond: the u.k. certainly is not. generation of nuclear power stations have come to the end of their lives, and we are replacing them. we are clear that nuclear has to be a part of the future clean energy mix. we will never get to the targets we have set ourselves without nuclear providing a significant element of the electricity generation baseload. other countries in europe have .ifferent positions on this it is a political challenge.

notoriously has committed to ending its dependence on nuclear energy. we believe that is misjudged. the british government policy position -- british government's position is that while governments in the european union must make agreements collectively to reducing our carbon footprints, individual nations should choose how to do that. if the germans want to cripple themselves by doing it in a less efficient way, that has to be the right to choose that. they are the biggest economy focusing on a nonnuclear future. we are clear that we will have a significant element of nuclear in our mix. right in the back, yes sir. hello. i am a former economist at the

world bank. the bank just put out a new report that there is going to be a new climate social network as well. my question is, how are we going to pay for all of this? it is through -- is it through the paris climate change, looking at exxon and others getting the tax and looking at climate problems in the u.s.? way, yournd: by the money -- a point i meant to make in response. talking about fossil fuel companies is kind of misleading, because most of these companies are also players in the renewable energy sector now. asy see themselves integrated providers of energy solutions looking into the future. let me interpret your question, because i have not seen this world bank report that you referred to. as there is a requirement part of the negotiation to mobilize large amounts of finance for global climate initiatives.

$100 billion a year by the end of the decade. it is clear that to bring the developing world with us, we have to be able to demonstrate how we are going to mobilize the kind of resource that is necessary to deliver this agenda. again, very important to emphasize -- this is not hundreds of billions of dollars of donated money or public funding. it is $100 billion of capital mobilized behind the investment programs that are needed to tackle these challenges. much of this money will be as ated by businesses proposition in response to the clear commitments that governments have made to do carbonized their economies. we have seen it in our own economy, we have set the parameters.

we have done it in the simplest way. we told the electric distribution companies that x of the products they distribute has to come from renewable serve -- renewable sources. how they do that is up to them. of course, that has placed a premium on renewable energy generated and sold into the grid. in the beginning, as there was a deficit of renewable energy, as the quantity of renewable energy being generated has increased in line with what you would expect, that premium has declined because there is now something between thebalance demand of the energy distributors to meet their obligations and the supply of renewable energy into the grid. ladies and gentlemen, we have come to the end of this period. i am delighted to have the foreign minister here. i am delighted that you all came

of this session. i would like for you to join me in thanking the former minister. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] look atht on c-span, a the job prospects for returning veterans with former first lady laura bush. then a look at the origins and history of the terrorist group islamic state, also known as isis. the prime minister of israel talks about the israel-palestinian conflict in washington. now, a look at job opportunities for veterans of reason wars. former first lady laura bush spoke at a summit organized by the u.s. chamber of commerce in washington. she addressed the challenges faced by the spouses of military veterans. we will also hear from dakota meyer and labor secretary tom