dr lee roth rym from the taxpayers alliance thank you well it's one of the enduring myths about russia hungry bears are roaming the streets but now there could actually be some truth to it with natural food supplies dwindling this year many wild animals have headed into towns in search of a meal peter all of has more on a bed as necessities. the bear one of the iconic images of russia recently though the relationship between these animals and the people who live alongside them has been less than cordial the searing heat and fires which swept through russia this summer destroyed much of the bear's winter food supply forcing them to search for alternatives in these russian city of safety of cars a twenty six year old man had a very lucky escape or he was attacked by a bear right in the center of the city the man was bitten in the neck and realizes how fortunate he was that i still can't understand how i escaped death i somehow managed to push the animal away so he felt crushing offense. elsewhere in the city there was a mormon carb incident involving a bear while visiting a cemetery two

and now more reaction from britain as emma boo from the taxpayers alliance joins us live from london hello there emma boon now the question i have for you is the influential institute for fiscal studies says that the cuts will hit the poorest the most now in what way exactly are they going to suffer. i think that the i.f.'s reaction to this which has been picked up quite widely by the media is slightly misleading the chancellor said when he stood up and made his speech the other day that those with the broadest shoulders will bear the largest burden now the way the i.f.'s is interpreted this they own their interpretation their purely looking at the fortunes of the poorest are based on how much money you're spending on them now that might seem to be intuitively true what we've saying said for a long time is that it's not necessarily how much money you're spending but how are you spending that money is it being wasted is it being spent effectively and i think that we've got to look across welfare across public services to try to identify where taxpayers' money is being wasted and to en

dr lee rather i'm from the taxpayers alliance told r.t. that although the states won changes to the treaty there are too small to be considered a success. the commission and the the council seem to be suggesting that although there's a treaty change it's considered to be a minor treaty change bearing in mind that the last change with respect to the m.e.p. numbers adding a few more days to the numbers that was achieved by a short meeting held in brussels without recourse to any referenda i'm not sure to what extent there is going to be a sort of a massive treaty change at this still a lot of play for because the the commission is going away and the various governments are chipping into a process that when we actually see a series of proposals coming out next summer and then after that there's another two year tension or the two years before the the change the treaty or fight so there's still a lot to play for but i think if you look at how the economic and monetary union was put together and you compare that with how other federal currencie

he's taxpayers alliance told r.t. the changes to the treaty are too small for the larger states to consider them a success. the commission and the the council seem to be suggesting that although there's a treaty change it's considered to be a minor treaty change in the in their words so bearing in mind that the last change with respect to the m.e.p. numbers adding a few more days to the numbers that was achieved by a short meeting held in brussels without recourse to any referendum not sure to what extent there is going to be a sort of a massive treaty change from the view of the of the the leaders in brussels and of course which has major implications for countries such as arland and the prospect of them having referenda there's still a lot of play for because the the commission is going away and the various governments are chipping into a process there and we actually see a series of proposals coming out next summer and then after that there's another two year tension or the two years before the the the the change t

membership so that's a huge question mark there which the taxpayers alliance and other organizations are campaigning to get the answer to where does that money go well a lot of it doesn't come back into the into the u.k. because the u.k. is after germany the second largest contributor to the the e.u. budget certainly in net terms and along with a small number of northern european countries it's one of the one of the few which are overall net contributors so you could say that a lot of it goes in terms of subsidizing and upgrading the superstructure and infrastructure of eastern and southern europe which from a british taxpayers viewpoint one has to question is a british taxpayer contributing billions of pounds a year effectively to another country is that it's not proper use of taxpayers' money so you're talking about one hundred ten billion euros which is an impossible think athame people to understand what does it mean what would it buy in real terms well let's let's narrow this down a little bit more i mean a hundred hundred ten billion euros is the overall cost including all evac

relations between european states and that's the view of dr lee rather in front of britain's taxpayers alliance pressure group of things that for some countries in membership cost more than it's worth watch the full interview later this hour but here is a preview. the cost of the regulations and red tape in this is based on the commission's own official commitment commission's own osa testing the cost of the regulations is for the in terms of the u.k. is greater than the actual value of the trade that is meant to regulate that's one perspective the second thing is if you just look at the not the the cost of the regulations but the simple physical cost and the membership fee that is the equivalent of forming a chain along appear and dumping a block of gold off the end of it every one hundred seconds. it's a gold ingots every hundred seconds just cast into the watery depths. and full interview with dr lee rather him in just under twenty minutes time here on r.t. . russia is seeking to prevent nato from placing major forces close to its borders and moscow has presented a plan which would limit the

relations between european states well that's the view of dr lee rather and from the britain's taxpayers alliance pressure group he thinks that for some countries either you membership costs more than it's worth you can watch the full interview next hour but here's a preview. the cost of the regulations and red tape in this is based on the commission's own officials their commitment commission's own osa testing the cost of the regulations is for the in terms of the u.k. is greater than the actual value of the trade that is meant to regulate that's one perspective the second thing is if you just look at the not the the cost of the regulations but the simple physical cost and the membership fee that is the equivalent of forming a chain along appear and dumping a block of gold off the end of it every one hundred seconds. it's a gold ingots every hundred seconds just cast into the watery depths. you are with r t coming to you live from moscow now let's let's check out some other stories making headlines around the world this hour and a local in haiti city of santa mark try to storm doctors without bo

relations between european states and that's the view of dr li rotheram from the britain's taxpayers alliance pressure group the thanks that for some countries membership costs more than it's worth watch the four hundred twenty minutes time but here's a preview. the cost of the regulations and red tape in this is based on the commission's own officials their commitment commission's own statistics the cost of the regulations is for the in terms of the u.k. is greater than the actual value of the trade that is meant to regulate that's one perspective the second thing is if you just look at the not the the cost of the regulations but the simple physical cost and the membership fees that is the equivalent of forming a train a longer pier and dumping a block of gold off the end of it every one hundred seconds. it's a golden goose every hundred seconds just cast into the watery depths. and the remaining u.s. troops in iraq are there to train local police to provide security in the troubled nation and in kurdish controlled care cook the result appears to be less violence and more stability but the n

austerity measures appear to be taking a more pragmatic approach to the issue evidence of the taxpayers' alliance explains . i think we did have a few small protests around westminster here the other day mostly led by the unions who have fears about how this will impact on public services and job losses but i think the important things to stress is that mostly broadly speaking people in britain are giving their support to these cops the most recent polling said that you know people are on board people understand that the u.k. has been spending more money than we have running a deficit and every year that we do that our national debt gets bigger and bigger and people understand that there now is a need to cut spending because if we don't do it soon then we're going to be paying more of our debt interest and we'll simply have more pain later here with r.t.m. coming your way in a few minutes counting people to counter problems. russian relook of russia's biggest q. and a session in over five years and follow the census takers us far as the international space station. how they say that oil and water

alliance to protect our allies. we are committed to funding it even if protection of the u.s. does not come until the very end. there are others who say this is u.s. taxpayerollars. we would like to contribute to this, particularly in the near to midterm, and the protection is directly to their benefit. you may see some in congress question why should u.s. taxpayer dollars be spent on something we do not derive direct benefit from. i do not think there is one particular view. >> i am going to ask you a question, and then i am going to turn to the audience to bring you into the conversation. your remarks were fairly positive on the idea of nato- russia cooperation. you had to deal with the trials and tribulations on issues like that. the secretary-general has been very clear that he sees missile defense of the major source of cooperation. there is even talk of president medvedev coming to the summit and this being one of the headline accomplishments, did you are no longer at nato. you are no longer constrained. is there much technical value added? what is the reality of how valuable this is and what it adds to the debate? second, we have seen a sense of rus