tv Public Affairs Events CSPAN November 24, 2016 2:00am-8:01am EST
e-mails and tweets live. go to booktv.org for the complete weekend schedule. coming up on c-span3, prime minister's question time in the british house of commons. then representatives from the u.s. and china speak after the annual joint commission on commerce and trade meetings. after that, the supreme court oral argument in two cases of miami suing banks for discriminatory mortgages. later, a forum on the middle east and issues impacting palestinians. now this week's question time in the british house of commons. prime minister theresa may was questioned on funding for the national health service by labor party leader jeremy corbyn. this is 35 minutes.
>> order. questions to the prime minister. mr. peter grant. >> mr. speaker, this morning i had meets with ministerial colleagues. i shall have further such meetings later today. >> thank you, mr. speaker -- recently produced by a number of organizations, including citizens of -- felt families who should have been claiming child support did not apply. a major application was obtained. under the 4% collection fee had a serious impact to family budgets. will the prime minister undertake to review these unfair charges? >> the issues of trying to ensure that those who are responsible for children actually pay for their children when a family has broken up has
been one that's been a longstanding question which this house has addressed. there have been various ways of dealing with it through the agency that has been responsible. i think it is right the changes that have been introduced are on a more level basis and more people are able to access the support that they need as a result. >> daniel kajinski. >> the government is focused on government growth, jobs and prosp prosperity, something that all of us on these benches can get behind. with that in mind, will she back our highly competitive bid for funding of the relief which will deal with the congestion our town is facing but dovetail into that narrative? >> well, again, i thank my honorable friend for raising this and not northwest relief road has been an issue that is of particular concern. to him, it's a priority to him and it's received considerable local backing. the local march has put in a bid for feasibility funding to
prepare a business case for the scheme. what i can say at the moment is the announcement at the successful bids for feasibility funding is expected very shortly indeed. >> jeremy corbyn. >> thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. speaker. the government's sustainable and transformation plans for the national health service hide 22 billion pounds of cuts from our service according to research by the bma. that risks, and i quote, starving services of resources and patients of vital care. that comes from dr. mark porter of the bma. when he calls this process a mess, where is he wrong? >> the national health service is indeed looking for savings within the nhs which will be reinvested in the nhs.
it is -- i would remind the right honorable gentleman it is this government providing not just the $8 billion of additional funding but 10 billion of extra funding requested by the national health service and the sustainability and transformation plans are being developed at local level in the interests of local people by local commissions. >> it's very strange the prime minister should say that, mr. speaker because the health select committee chaired by the honorable member says it's 4.5 billion, not 10 billion. it's quite a big -- there's quite a big difference there. mr. speaker, part of the reason for the strain on our national health service is that more than 1 million people are not receiving the social care that they need. as a result of this, there's been an increase in emergency admissions for older patients. margaret wrote to me this week saying -- it's not funny.
she described how her 89-year-old mother suffered two falls leading to hospital admissions due to the lack of nursing care. and went on to say, my mother is worth more than this. what action will the prime minister take to stop the neglect of older people which ends up forcing them to take a&e admissions when they should be cared for at home or in a care home? >> well, of course, social care is an area of concern. and social care is a key issue for many people. that's why the government has introduced the better care fund. that's why the government has introduced the social care precept for local authorities. and we're encouraging the working together of the health service and the local authorities to deal with precisely the issues he's raised on social care and bed blocking.
but i will say this to the right honorable gentleman. we've introduced the better care and better care precept. let's look what labor did in their 13 years. they -- they said -- they said they would deal with social care in the 97 manifesto. introduced a royal commission in 1999. a green paper in 2005. the review in 2006. said they'd sort it in the csr of 2007 and another green paper in 2009. 13 years, and they did nothing. >> mr. speaker, as the prime minister well knows, health spending tripled under the last labor government. and the levels of satisfaction with -- and the levels of satisfaction with the national health service were at their
highest ever in 2010. this government's choice was to cut social care by 4.6 billion pounds in the last parliament. at the same time as they found the space, shall we say, to cut billions in corporate taxation bills. that means it's affecting patients leaving hospital as well. in the last four years, the number of patients unable to be transferred from hospital due to the lack of adequate social care has increased by one-third. will the prime minister ensure her government guarantees all of our elderly people the dignity they deserve? >> i recognize the importance of caring for elderly people and providing them with the dignity that they deserve. it's -- he says that this government has done nothing on social care. i repeat, we've introduced the social care precept that's being
made use of by my local authorities and his local authority. we've also introduced the better care fund. if he talks about support for elderly people, i'd remind him which government put the triple lock in place for pensioners. it's ensured the largest increase in pensions for elderly people. >> the precept is a drop in the ocean compaird to what's necessary for social care. and i give you an example, mr. speaker. the whole hour, i'm sure, would have been appalled by the revelations in bbc panorama program this week showing older people simatically mistreated. the care quality commission's assessment that care homes run by the moorly group require improvement and has issued warning notices. the commission goes on to say that the owner has allowed services to deteriorate further and has, and i quote, utterliy in glecneglected the duty and c of people in these homes. what action is her government
going to take to protect the residents of those homes? >> the right honorable gentleman raises the issue of the quality of care that is provided in homes and the way in which elderly people are treats. i'm sure everybody is appalled when we see examples of poor and terrible treatment that is given to elderly and vulnerable people in care homes. what we do about it is ensure that we have the cqc which is able to step in, which takes action, which has powers to make sure that nobody -- nobody in the chain of responsibility is immune from legal accountability. but we know there's more that can be done and that's why the cqc is looking into ways in which it can improve its processes, increase its efficiency. the -- my honorable friend, the minister for community health and care will be writing to the cqc shortly to look at how we can see to improve what they do. it's the cqc that deals with these issues. we have that in place.
is there more we can do? yes, we're doing it. >> mr. speaker, the problem seems to be that that home was understaffed and we shouldn't be blaming often underpaid and hard-pressed care workers. we should be ensuring there are enough of them properly paid in all of those homes. there was a serious problem of understaffing. a warning notice is insufficient. yesterday, mr. speaker, the government proposed that patients may have to show passports or other i.d. to access nonemergency health care. has the government considered that the impact of this on elderly people, the last census showed us that 9.5 million people in this country don't have passports? rather than distracting people with divisive and impractical policies, could the prime minister provide the nhs and social care with the money that it needs to care for the people
who need the support? >> over the course of this parliament the government will be spending half a trillion pounds on the national health service. the right honorable gentleman asked about a process to ensure the people who are receiving nhs treatment are entitled to receive that nhs treatment. for many years, there has been a concern about health tourism, about people turning up in the uk, accessing health services and not paying for them. we want to make sure that those who are entitled to use the services are, indeed, able to see these free of the point of delivery that we deal with health tour uemploy and those wo should be paying for our health services. >> mr. speaker, sir simon stevens told us the next three years will be the toughest ever for nhs funding and 2018 would
see health spending per person cut for the first time ever in this country. and the nao reported the cost of health tourism is over 100 times less than the 22 billions of cuts the nhs is facing from this government. the reality is, mr. speaker, under this government, there are 6,000 fewer mental health nurses. the record 3.9 million people on nhs waiting lists. all of us who visit a&e departments know the stress the staff are under and the waiting team is getting longer and longer. and that there are 1 million people in this country not receiving the social care they need. so instead of looking for excuses and scapegoats, shouldn't the prime minister be ensuring that health and social care is properly resourced and properly funded to take away the stress and fear that people face in old age over social care and the stress that is placed on our
very hard-working nhs and social care staff? >> billions of pounds extra into social care through the social care precept and the better care fund. half a trillion pounds being spent on the national health service. a record level of investment in mental health in the national health service. >> order. order. members must not shout down or attempt to shout down the prime minister. the question has been asked and it was heard and the answer must be heard. the prime minister. >> there's a fundamental point the right honorable gentleman refrain from mentioning. we can only afford to pay for the national health service if we have a strong economy creating wealth. and that's precisely what he's going to hear from the chancellor in a few minutes time. >> order. >> thank you, mr. speaker.
on the 23rd of june, my constituents voted by a margin of 62% to 38% to leave the european union. many of those people -- many of those people are unhappy and frustrated at what they see are delaying tactics by some remainers who don't seem to understand the meaning of the word democracy. >> this is very discourteous. the honorable gentleman has a legitimate question and that question and every other question should be fully and with politeness heard. the honorable gentleman. >> thank you, mr. speaker. and i will repeat it. those who don't seem to understand the meaning of the word democracy which i would remind them is government by the people especially rule of the majority. with that in mind, what reassurance can my right honorable friend give my
constituents and me that's article 50 will betriggered by march next year. >> i'm sure we will trigger article 50 by march next year. but my honorable friend is absolutely right to make the key point. a referendum was decided -- it was decided by this parliament, 6-1, that the people should have the opportunity to vote on membership in the european union. the vote was held. the turnout was high. the public gave their verdict. there must be no second referendum, no attempt to weasel out of this. this is the government. >> we have repeatedly brought up the devastating impact on disabled people from the uk benefits and system. the government plans to cut support for people with long-term health difficulties by 30 pounds a week. last week, my s&p colleague
proposed a motion which was passed by this house with support from labor and conservative members for these cuts to be postponed. will the prime minister act on the vote of this house? >> what we've been doing in relation to benefits for disabled people. the overall funding for disability benefits will be higher in every year up to 2020 than it was in 2010. we've been focusing support on those who most need it, those who were not able to get into the workplace. for those who are able at some stage to get into the workplace, we've been providing a wider package of support. i'm pleases to say over the last three years, nearly 600,000 more disabled people are now in the workplace with the dignity of having a job which is what many people with disabilities want to have. so we're focusing help on those who most need it and helping those with disabilities who want to get into the workplace to do just that. >> it's widely known that the
prime minister william make changes impacting benefit recipients. will the presume minister confirm she has no intention of helping people with disabilities and medical conditions. why should people who are unable to earn a living be punished for their disability or illness by losing 30 pounds a week? does she have any intention of changing that? >> i have just set out for the right honorable gentleman the ways in which we are providing support and help for those peoples -- people who have disabilities. as i said, the overall funding -- spending on disability benefits will be higher in every year to 2020 than it was in 2010. but it is also important to recognize that when we give support for people with disabilities, it isn't simply about the benefit system and how much money they're given. for those in the workers -- those who are able to get into work and on that part of the esa, we provide packages which are outside of the benefits as well because we recognize that people want the dignity of getting into the workplace.
that's what we are helping people with disabilities who can work to do. >> simon burns. >> will my right honorable friend agree that thousands of road commuters, including many of my constituents who use the a-12 are traveling on roads that need to be repaired and upgraded. to improve connectivity and to speed up daily commute times, would my right honorable friend accept that the proposed 1.3 billion-pound investment at improving our road network is warmly welcome and will do a great deal to enhance connectivity? >> well, my honorable friend is absolutely right. the importance of infrastructure
expenditure in deal with the issue of productivity in our economy. and i'm pleased that 1.3 billion for new roads does show us investing in the long-term future for britain. it will lead -- it's about delivering jobs. it's about delivering economic growth. it's about making sure that this is an economy that works for everyone. it's just one part of the package that we're proposing but, of course, my right honorable friend, the chancellor accident will be setting our proposals out clearly in a few minutes time. >> thank you, mr. speaker. my constituent is in prison in iran. a british national has been separated from her husband and her 2-year-old daughter for eight months now. she has been on hunger strike and is now suicidal. the prime minister needs to reunite this mother, this daughter, this wife, with her family. mr. speaker, will it take her death for the government to start taking her seriously?
>> obviously, this is a very difficult time for the whole family. i'm sure we're all concerned about the reports of the impact that detention is having on nasanin ratcliffe's health as she's in detention in iran. this issue has been repeatedly raised with the iranian government by the uk government. the previous secretary and current secretary. i personally raised it with president rouhani in new york. i have since written to president rouhani requesting confirmation of the charges, the sentence and appeals process and assurances that she will be allowed full legal representation and regular contact with her family. but we will continue to do everything we can for the family, and that includes the british government remaining ready to help them bring mrs. zagari ratcliffe's daughter back to britain, if that is a
request. >> does my right honorable friend agree most of our social problems are either caused or agrigated by the akutd shortage of housing. so even if as i hope we manage to reduce the net immigration to this country, we will have to build far more new homes. so isn't the recommendation to increase by 50% the reserves banks must hold against house building making it even more costly for them to lend for housing than for unsecured credit cards, profoundly unhelpful and perverse? >> well, my right honorable friend will recognize we are subject to our own regulation authorities. the overall point about the importance of house building is absolutely correct. we do need to build more homes. that's something the government has been doing. we've seen something like 900,000 new homes being bluilt
since 2010. and that's something this government is working pongets angela smith. >> the brexit secretary and the foreign secretary are described by a senior german politician as having no idea what brexit really means. the times reports today that eu ambassadors think the foreign secretary's more colorful outbursts are damaging our relationships with member states. when is the prime minister going to get a grip on her ministers, and when is she going to demonstrate to the country and to our eu colleagues that she has a coherent, workable plan for brexit? >> i've been very clear in this house on many occasions about the plan we have for brexit. crucially, we will be leaving the european union, and we will be triggering article 50 by the end of march next year when the formal negotiations will start.
but it is absolutely right that we do not set out at this stage every single detail of our proposed negotiating strategy because that's would be the best way to get the worst possible deal for britain. >> as we leave the european union, maintaining the uk's cutting edge in world leadership in scientific and technological discovery is of paramount importance to our industries and universities. can i welcome the prime minister's announcement that each year we'll invest a further 2 billion in research and development to boost our science and engineering phase? isn't this, mr. speaker, just the type of vital support that our businesses and researchers need, rather than the threats from the labor party to slash the r&d tax credits which would hamper innovation and harm our economy. >> my right honorable friend is absolutely right. the extra investment we'll be putting into research and development is a crucial part of
the long-term task we have of ensuring that we have the economy and the growth and prosperity in this country that we need. the new funds will be able to put us at the cutting edge of scientific discovery which i saw for myself. we are already doing this. i was at the welcome genome campus in cambridge on monday, able to see the really exciting, really transformational work that is being done coming out of the knowledge base and scientific research here in the united kingdom. we want to see more of that. that's why we'll be reinvesting in it. >> thank you, mr. speaker. aleppo's hospitals are destroyed and syrians who avoid the barrel bombs and the chlorine gas are starving from the russian-backed blockade. we must do more. so will she revisit the prospect for aid drops, and will she look at backing the campaign to stop this daily perpetrator of war
crimes of stripping them of its right to hold the 2018 world cup? >> well, the honorable gentleman is right to raise the issue of the appalling atrocities taking place in aleppo. and it is right that we along with our international allies should be doing all that we can to try to bring this to a stop. he will recognize that the issue of who hosts sporting events is not in the government's remid. we're work with our international allies to put more pressure on russia to stop the appalling atrocities, the appalling attacks taking place in aleppo. what we want to see is an agreement for a political transition to a syria without president assad. >> does my right honorable friend agree that if the uk is to remain competitive and citizens are to enjoy the benefits of a digital revolution, we should be at the forefront of deployment of ultra fast broadband and 5g mobile
connectivity? can i, therefore, welcome the announcement which we are led to believe may be made shortly ever a 1 billion bound investment, too -- to achieve this. >> my right honorable friend will be waiting in anticipation for the autumn statement. but he's absolutely right that as we look at improving productivity in this country, as we look to the economy of the future, what the provision of that superfast broadband, the provision of those new technological opportunities for people is absolutely a crucial part of that. and that is something this government recognizes and will act on. >> thank you, mr. speaker. one day last week, five police officers in my constituency were assaulted over a single 24-hour period. there were over 23,000 assaults on police officers last year and an assault on a police officer is an assault on society. what will the proom minister do somake sure tough deterrents are
in place and when will see reduce the need by re [ inaudible ]. >> can i send my best wishes to those who were assaulted in your constituency last week. it simm portent we recognize when police officers go out on duty and off duty, they sometimes find themselves intervening in situations where they do find themselves on the receiving end of assaults and violence against them. they are willing to go forward in the line of duty where others are not. and we recognize that's. what we have done in relation to this is we are looking -- one of the things we want to do is to identify the -- the number of assaults taking place. we issued some provisional figures last year. we're improving those figures this year. sentencing guidelines already allow for an assault on a police officer to be taken as an aggravating factor into account. but also, new developments like the body worn videos, actually
help to provide the evidence that's ensure that people can be brought to justice and that actually deter assaults in the first place. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the prime minister shares my concern that the level of acute hospital bed blocking. does she agree with me that part of the solution is to promote community hospital beds where they still exist in places like warminster and sharpsbury as part of the sustainability and transformation process? >> as regards to the stp process, that will take place at the local level. these proposals will be considered and put forward by local clinicians. but the concept of being able to deal with the bed blocking in a variety of ways is absolutely right. there are good examples around the country where having those step down beds available is actually resolving the problem of bed blocking. there are other ways it's being done. parts of the country where social workers are being employed by hospital trusts, for
example. buts very good to recognize the good practice while it's being done. >> thank you, mr. speaker. earlier this month kiran conway confessed he took part in robberies, bombings and gun attacks that murdered british soldiers. he stated he will never disclose information on any fellow airman despite knowing details of [ inaudible ] as constituting war crimes. can the prime min stoister assue they'll apply for the extradition of this criminal from the republic of ireland? >> the kw is whether or not an individual would be extradited it would be for the appropriate prosecution investigation and prosecution authorities to take. what i do say to the honorable gentleman is we do, of course, recognize the concerns for those
cases where it is still possible to bring people for justice and, obviously, want to see that being done. >> mr. speaker, during the last six years, we've had three major referendums all with varying degrees of excitement. would the prime minister agree with me that's you can have too much excitement and will she, therefore, rule out any further rrc referendums in this parliament? >> well, my honorable friend is trying to -- one thing i will certainly rule out is a second referendum on whether or not we leave the european union. >> mr. speaker -- they've launched a financial appeal because of the increasing numbers of people finding themselves homeless as a direct result of the uk's pursuit of austerity. how can the prime minister sleep in her warm bed at night knowing her government's policies have
consigned people to a cold christmas? >> the government is taking action in a variety of ways to address the issue of homelessness. of course, one of the key things we need to do is ensure we see more homes being built in this country. she talks about austerity in the sort of tone that she refers to it. austerity is about us living within our means. and we should -- and we should always remember -- we should always remember when we're talking about government providing support for individuals, the taxpayers have to pay for that support. and many taxpayers are themselves struggling to get by. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the prime minister will be aware that yesterday the peninsula rail task force launched its report commissioned following the storms. does she welcome the report and will she commit the government
to ensuring the vision it outlines is delivered? >> i thank my honorable friend for his question. can i suggest that he exercises a little more patience and listens very carefully to what my right honorable friend the chancellor has to say. >> mr. speaker, in these uncertain times, we all surely agree that britain needs strong defense. so how can the prime minister justify her government's decision to scrap all the navy's heavy weight surface to surface guided missiles or any replacement? >> i have to say, i don't recognize the picture he presents of what the government is doing in relation to the armed forces. we're investing billions of pounds in ensuring our armed forces do have the missiles, the boats, the ships for the royal navy and the other pieces of equipment for the other armed forces. so the picture he presents is not the picture i recognize.
>> thank you, mr. speaker. would my right honorable friend agree that it would be good for confidence in the rule of law if judges did not enter into speculative public thoughts on cases that they are about to hear? >> we value in this country the independence of our judiciary. that's the independence of the judiciary when they come to make their judgments in court but also they are independent and it is to them to determine what they choose to put in their speeches or not. not for the government to tell them what to do. >> mr. speaker. mr. speaker, as millions of public sector workers face another year of suppressed pay, after another week of shambolic brexit negotiations and with a national health service facing a winter crisis, facing a winter
crisis and crying out for cash, does the prime minister worry that her government is only just about managing? >> well, i have to say to the right honorable gentleman that we're very clear about the amounts of money we're putting into the national health service. he talks about the negotiations. actually, the negotiations for us leaving the european union don't formally start until we trigger article 50. we will be triggering article 50 by the end of march next year. what the right honorable gentleman wants to do is stop us from leaving the european union by denying the people the decision n the deliverability of the vote that they took rightly on the 23 rd of june. he wants to deny people what they want. we're going to give it to them. >> mr. speak emay i raise the concerns of millions s os of d across the united kingdom who worry about the cost of driving, whether her government will look at keeping that down and also
the pump pricing and how it has worked as the oil prices changed. pryces jump like a rocket and fall like a fetather. >> i recognize that many people look with very great concern about the cost of motoring in this country. i suggest, as i have done to some of my other honorable friends that's he's a little more patient and await the chancellor's augtumn statement. >> the prime minister has talked about her worries with social care but surely we have to judge her by her actions. in the last six years, there's been a 37% on average cut in local authority funding. 57% in my area and nearly a quarter of all of those older people in need of social care have been denied any help at all. what is she going to do about it? >> the lady might have noticed i've been asked several questions about social care.
and i would give the answer -- i will give the answer that i have given previously. what this government is doing about social care is putting more money in through the better care fund, giving local authorities the opportunity through the social cares precept and making sure health and social care come together to ensure that we deal with the issue of bed blocking. >> thank you, mr. speaker. how many of us were charging into a darken store at night knowing that inside were three mask-wearing crowbar wielding thugs trying to rob a store. my two constituents did just that. and by intervening, the thugs fled, leaving the money. the staff were hurt less, and one of the gentleman was hurt himself. will my honorable friend join me in praising their courage n selflessness in this extraordinary act of bravado? >> i absolutely -- i absolutely
agree with my honorable friend, and i commend the bravery and courage that was shown by those two individuals. i think you said nigel and garth who stepped into that situation to ensure that it was not as bad as it might have been. that is incredible bravery. there are many members of the public who would not have been willing to step forward in that way. and can he pass my best wishes on to those individuals. >> mr. speaker, does the prime minister believe that big companies should put a worker on the board? >> i believe that we should see workers representation on boards. and i make no apology for the fact that this government is going to deliver on that. for all their years in government, the labor party did nothing. friday, a conversation between former secretary of
state henry kissinger and former british prime minister john major. bbc parliament's briefings program hosted the discussion on foreign policy challenges since the nixon era. see it at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. c-span's "washington journal" live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up thursday morning, economic adviser to president-elect trump steven moore joins us to discuss mr. trump's proposal to lower taxes, increase the number of jobs and plans to grow the economy. then robert weisman, president of the non-profit organization public citizen will talk about their plans to fight the trump administration on deregulation in a variety of areas. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern thursday morning. join the discussion.
the 27th session of the u.s./china joint commission on commerce and trade took place wednesday in washington. following the meeting, commerce secretary penny pritzker and michael froman held a news conference. this is 30 minutes. >> all right. good afternoon. i'd like to welcome everyone to the u.s. principals press conference at the closing of the 27th u.s./china joint commission on commerce and trade. united states secretary of commerce penny pritzger and trade representative michael froman will each deliver opening statements before taking questions from the press. i'd now like to invite them to
deliver their statements. >> thank you very much, and good afternoon, everyone. thank you for joining us as we conclude the 27th meeting of the u.s./china joint commission on trade and commerce. i'd like to thank vice premier wang young and his team for traveling halfway around the world to meet with us this week. i would also like to recognize ambassador froman, ambassador baucus and secretary vilsack for their hard work and the work of our teams to make this dialogue a success. when the vice premier, ambassador froman and i began the process of re-imagining the jcct during a tea break in beijing several years ago, we committed to building a more dynamic and effective economic dialogue between the united states and china. a commercial relationship that is critical not only to our
countries but to global economic growth and stability. our two markets are the largest on the planet. together, our populations total 1.7 billion people, just shy of a quarter of the planet. and combined, u.s./china trade in goods and services adds up to 20% of all international trade. the role of the jcct is to expand this relationship by addressing commercial challenges head-on and producing concrete results for both our countries. before today's talks commenced, we had already made progress on cooperation in economic statistics reporting and issues related to wto mandated transparency procedures. in our government to government meetings today, among other issues we focused on pharmaceutical and medical device market access, the future of the semiconductor industry,
technology and innovation policy and china's excess capacity challenges in multiple sectors. on pharmaceutical and medical device market access, we made progress on two of the u.s. industry's top priority issues. china committed to treating both domestic and foreign medical devices the same in regards to procurement which will level the playing field for american companies who sell their products into china. china also reaffirmed the drug registration review and approval will not be linked to pricing commitments and will not require specific pricing information. on semiconductors, we're pleased that china confirmed that its government has not asked their semiconductor investment funds to require technology transfer in order to participate in their
projects. while far from resolving our concerns about china's semiconductor development program, we hope that the inkremtsal progress that we made on this issue today will lead to future actions to address our company's concerns. while we have had a productive day, significant challenges in our relationship do remain. we continue to have fundamentally difference views on the appropriate role of the state and the economy. for example, as -- in regards to technology and innovation policy, we continue to have serious concerns about china's pursuit of policies that support indigenous innovation and require data localization. american companies continue to confront challenges related to intellectual property rights and trade secrets theft in the chinese market. though we recognize that china is working hard on this issue.
we also remain deeply concerned about excess capacity, particularly as it relates to steel and aluminum. we recognize that china faces challenges of its own in addressing this issue, but the responsible parties must meet to develop both short-term improvements and long-term solutions. in addition, despite progress on the semiconductor issue, we remain concerned that state-driven and state-financed investment will create market distortions in china as well as around the world. these distortions not only threaten long-term innovation in this very critical sector, but will hurt u.s. firms and workers and further undermine support for open trade and investment. looking at these and other challenges more broadly, it is clear that china has a long way to go forwatowards achieving it
declared ambitions, including letting market forces play a decisive role in its economy. as the two largest economies in the two largest markets in the world, constructive engagement and sustained diplomacy between the united states and china are critical to making progress on the issues that remain in our relationship. although this will be my last time serving as co-chair, i want to emphasize that this dialogue, the jcct has been and will remain the essential forum for promoting more commerce for deepening trust and for addressing real business challenges. now and into the future, the jcct is an opportunity for us to build a legacy of cooperation, respect and stronger u.s./china economic ties. thank you very much, and happy thanksgiving.
>> let me thank secretary pritzger and vice premier yung for co-chairg this jcct forum and for their personal commitment and the commitment of their teams that has made the jcct a success. 44 years after establishing diplomatic relations, it's absolutely clear that the u.s./china relationship is the most important bilateral relationship of the 21st century. over the course of the last eight years, we've used the jcct as an effective mechanism for resolving trade and investment disputes and barriers and enlisting the support of the u.s. government and the private sector communities of both countries in china's reform efforts. if you look back, since 2009, jcct has been very helpful, for example, recognizing the companies should make autonomous decisions about where and when and how to transfer technology.
it's been helpful in terms of enforcing competition laws in china in ways that are transparent and nondiscriminatory. and it's been helpful in reassuring foreign suppliers to china that icct products can continue to have access to that market. as we come to this final jcct, president obama's administration, we face headwinds around the world about the benefits of trade. and some skepticism about the u.s./china relationship itself. we recognize the true value of the jcct commitments comes in their full implementation. so this year, we had a particular focus on how past jcct commitments have been implemented. for example, we welcome steps by china to ensure the full implementation of commitments to measures that link indigenous innovation to government procurement. in addition, we appreciated china's willingness to continue our dialogue about technology issues that appear to
contradictor joint outcomes in the area of information security. china agreed to take on new commitments in the areas of intelectual rights, and took some important steps to bolster its trade secrets, including legislative changes and judicial doctrines that impact the vulnerability of injunctions and trade secret theft. they build upon work we've been doing in this area in apec and elsewhere. we continue to do work to better address online ipr infringement in china to strengthen protections for sports broadcasts, to secure the needed reforms and to address bad faith trademark applications as well as outdated licensing requirements. in the area of innovation policy, we obtain important commitments that it's so-called controllable policies will not discriminate against foreign
companies. and to ensure greater transparency in this area, china committed to notify their regulations to the wto. this sends an important signal to many businesses and players in the economy who are engaging in our growing and dynamic digital economy which is a major focus of our discussions this week that these kinds of rules won't get in the way of the development of the digital ecosystem. in the area of industrial policy, china has committed to hold the first global forum on steel excess capacity in recognition of the many challenges posed by excess capacity to the united states and to producers, workers all around the world. and we look forward to convening that forum before the end of the administration. as the secretary said, in the area of semiconductors, china has agreed its semiconductor funds will be market based and will not make ip and technology conditions -- will not impose conditions in terms of foreign
participation. we've made a number of concrete steps on issues in our bilateral relationship but certainly more throughout the supply chain as well as to the future of food security in china itself. we'll continue to press for progress in this area including with regard to the approval and more efficient approval times and to invest our treaty to increase trade and investment between our countries. but one of the things is that as
we head into this transition where there is uncertainty it's important that we put this relationship on firm aground as even keel as possible. that includes open and frank discussions and making concrete progress on the outstanding issues. we made clear in our discussions with the vice premiere and his delegation that the american public has certain expectations about the u. s.-china relationship. that they expect and demand a level playing field and demand that china takes steps with those that create impacts around the world.
and lay the work for the future. today's outcomes are one step on the path to forge a stronger more fair and more open trade and investment relationship with chi china and we look forward to the months and weeks a head. >> our out let is the wall street journal. is china reached a point to where the u. s. can call it a
market economy? secondly to what extent have you all been reaching out to your colleagues bilaterally or at the wto to reassure them and president election transition team. >> it's very clear and his team in multiple parts of our meetings how important market economy status is to china. having said that our market economy status determinations are strictly governed by six statutory factors and due
process considerations and any review of the status would need to be made by the department of commerce in an antidumping proceedings and consistent with those six factors that are statutory. so it's a conversation that we have engaged in and it is not one at this moment that is right for us to change our protocol and nothing requires the wto members automatically grant market economy status to china or discontinue use of alternative antidumping methodologies on december 11th 2016. so that is the position outlined
and our approach to this position with the chinese. >> in terms of your second question you know the president just returned from a trip to europe and peru where he saw 21 asia pacific economies there. leaders from those countries. not surprisingly received a lot of questions from them. looking for insights into on going policy by the united states and i think the general message that was conveyed and that we received back from the countries we were engaging with was it's important to wait and see. we have a newly elected president who needs time to appoint his people to get their feet on the ground and go
through whatever policy development process they're going to go through. >> thank you. we have been contacted them on the floor to sit down with them in the coming days. >> we too have been contacted but we have not had a chance to dive in yet. >> this is the last of obama administration so as a chair what kind of legacy do you want in terms of trade and business between u.s. and china and how can china and the u.s. make economy.
thank you. >> you know as i shared with the vice premiere and the entire delegation, you know, the u.s. china relationship is one of the most important bilateral relationships of the still young 21st century and successful long-term growth in our respective economies and in the global economy depends on our two countries being able to address our challenges and work together and that's important regardless of the government of the day and over the last four years we demonstrated to ourselves that the reimagined has helped us to make progress but also it's helped us to
deepen our relationship and better understands both perspectives as well as facts on the ground as ait relates to different issues and obviously this year we talked about digital trade and health care and we talked about travel and tourism as strategic issues so i think that we tried to identify places we could be cooperative and i think we tried to work through important differences but and there's always going to be things to work on and it's important that we have sustained
engagement and also important that we show momentum with our outcomes and we have impressed that upon our partners the chine chinese. >> if you look back over the last 8 years it's been an important period where we mobilized an international effort that helped keep that great recession from becoming a great depression. we worked together in various multilateral forum to orient the agenda of the world trade organization and make progress on information technology and progress on agricultural subsidies and cooperated together two countries in nonproliferation and climate change activities. and we have differences. in an economic relationship this
broad and this deep, differences are inevitable. the only question is how do we manage them? and it's been a key mechanism for helping to manage those differences. to build cooperation. to develop shared understandings and strategic issues and i think it's achieved a number of important objectives but there's much more work to be done and as i mentioned earlier the american public expects a relationship that is based on a fair and level playing field and greater openness and greater reciprocity and that continues to be in focus going forward. >> i just wanted to ask the investor, you mentioned again the bilateral investment treaty and there were discussions this week on that. just two months left in the administration. >> do you think there's a
realistic chance of getting an agreement before the end of the administration and does the fact that there's a new administration coming in, without having any sort of inhibiting impact on the talks and then just a little more information on the global forum. i believe -- well one of you said that beijing or china would be hosting that. does that mean there will be a meeting in china? and what is it that you would expect to come from the global forrule. some sort of binding commitment or just more talk. >> yeah with regard to the treaty this is part of our on going dialogue with china for some tile. from our perspective it's an important mechanism for opening china's economy and for creating certain disciplines and for promoting economic reform in china. we made it clear that whatever
we do has to address the specific issues that arise in the u.s.-china context. that is an on going process that we continue to have dialogue with them about. >> as it relates to the global forum on access capacity the vice premiere and his team indicated that they appreciate how important it is to try to have that meeting. i don't think that there's a commitment that the meeting is in china but rather that the meeting occurs before the end of this administration and that's something they committed to do at the g-20 which is to hold this forum and we uncouraged them that the importance of them
doing that and demonstrating their commitment to addressing what is a global problem not just a u.s. problem. >> good morning. so my question is so you both identified in your remarks that bilateral trade is important for both economies. however there has been. >> you know we have to understand that trade is a part
of american businesses and american workers livelihoods depend upon trade. we have i think somewhere around 11.5 million americans whose jobs depend on the ability of american companies to export and way our administration has addressed the need for trade and how to execute trade in a way that it is beneficial to americans and our american workers and not just american businesses is to negotiate and work on trade agreements that express value of the importance of labor. the importance of environmental and benefit from trade agreements.
the importance of an open digital economy. so it is very important that we can -- that we pursue trade and as the ambassador did, you know, given a level playing field american workers and american companies are up for the competition. what we work on at the jcct is where we face an unlevel playing field. we work on both trying to explain policies that discriminate against american companies and american workers but we also work on better understanding the situation within china so that we can help our companies navigate to the best of their capacity so that's
why this engagement is to critical. it is a mechanism for us to continue to create market access for american companies and we did have very candid conversations with our counter parts from china about not only the realities of trade. unfair trade and unfair market access and also the perceptions here in the united states and their need to address both of them.
extraordinarily high priority and it's not just words but it reflects ourselves in the action. >> thank you that's all the time we have for today. for members of the media of the chinese principles press conference will take place shortly. thank you. friday a conversation between henry kisinger and the briefings program hosted the discussion on foreign policy challenges since the nixon era. see it at 8:00 p.m. eastern on cspan. we'll have a conversation about the book lincoln's generals
wives. four women that influenced the civil war for better and for worse. >> so you can see too that women have -- have a means of reinforcing either the best in their husbands or the worst. and that's what this study is. and then at 10:00 the 1953 film american frontier. >> and from there to the central office in oklahoma. day and night our telephone board was lit up like a christmas tree. calls from new york, california, houston, bit by bit we began to realize how big a thing this was. >> the fill promoted the financial benefit of farmers and was funded by the american petroleum institute and now his
novel the call of the wild influenced generations of novelists and writers. >> he always looked back to his ranch and to the beautiful scenery in california and elsewhere in the south pacific. to center himself and to find release and relief from the rigors and the defwre dadegreda the city. >> this airplane basically taught all the military aviators, army, air core and navy how to fly. many guys never even saw a plane coming from the farms and anywhere that you can think of and the first airplane they saw was the boeing.
jccp. [ speaking foreign language ] >> the current jcpt is the last high level dialogue between china and the united states and the obama administration. it has an important das k to imple m the consensus reached by the two presidents. expand mutually beneficial cooperation and ensure china u. s. economic and trade relations. co-chaired by the vice premiere on the chinese side and on the u. s. side secretary of commerce
china and the united states reach consensus in innovation policy. they believe that innovation is a critical driving force for economic development, and shared prosperity. the two sides confirm that in their respective security measures in the commercial sector concerning ict they will not adopt a necessary discriminatory practices and the flow of information. [ speaking foreign language ]
>> china and the united states agreed for the establishment of a global capacity and have dialogue in the year 2017 and that they agreed to exchange information on aluminum and the industri industries. >> china and the united states confirm that equitable transparent and now discriminatory manner organizations and individuals from the other side will be allowed in the making of technical regulations and the conformity assessment procedures of the central government
between standards and the intellectual property rights. and the trademark registration. technology exports and imports of the administration or casting crack down and issues of common concern. and the trade secrets. [ speaking foreign language ] >> the united states has been committed that the u.s. welcomes foreign investment.
>> and all foreign investors. it will continue to help chinese enterprises to better understand the business environment in the united states and the levels. the united states via this initiative will provide formation to chinese investors. [ speaking foreign language ] >> clare fies on the official website with the agencies we have published laws, regulations, rules, guidelines,
the administrative punishment and concentration of undertakers according to the law we use regular and timely updates. [ speaking foreign language ] >> china according to its laws and the regulations, the government procurement project for medical devices and falling manufacture products. more communication and exchanges with other parties on this issue. [ speaking foreign language ]
workshop as well as a business luncheon. all of these events provide good platforms for exchanges reaching government officials and people from the business community during that session. [ speaking foreign language ] >> both china and the united states dealt with high priorities to the achievements we have made. it's achievements in a practical way.
chinese-u.s. economic trade relations are mutually beneficial. it has aed more economic and trade substance to the new model into china and the united states. in the future the two countries will continue to make the best reviews of jcct as an important economic and trade cooperation platform and it will continue to promote the bilateral cooperation for bilateral relations and our mutual differences. and china, u.s. economic and trade relations will move forward. in a healthy and stable manner. >> thank you. [ speaking foreign language ]
[ speaking foreign language ] >> in the current session we had further discussion on the issue and consolidated the progress that we have made. the two sides expressed appreciation of the results that we have made in mutual recognition area. [ speaking foreign language ] >> in the current session mit has discussed cooperation of the
network of automobiles and we have also exchanged our views. how to put a cooperation of semi-conductor and the battery of the new energy vehicles. >> these outcomes have been included in the final outcomes. [ speaking foreign language ] >> also actively participated in the workshop during the current session. at the same time china semi-conductor cooperation has
met with the counter part in the united states and we organized the business matching the event for the semi-conductor industry and express satisfaction after attending this event. [ speaking foreign language ] >> china and the united states and different economic development. the two economies are the two largest in the world. we enjoy a high degree in the industrial center. in the future the ministry of industry and information technology will continue to work actively on the mat form including our industrial
cooperation as well as cooperation in the telecom sector. [ speaking foreign language ] >> in particular we hope that relevant chinese concerns including those concerns about individual cases will be addressed so that we can see a more transparent and equitable environment for business development. [ speaking foreign language ] >> now i wish to give the floor
[ speaking foreign language ] >> in the past four years we have been committed to supply side cultural reform in the agriculture sector and progress in the agriculture sector. china and the united states enjoy a high degree in the agriculture sector in both countries. drive cooperation forward. [ speaking foreign language ]
>> particularly in the agriculture sectors we have different ideas and ways approaches in promoting our cooperation. >> for example, the u.s. agriculture sector is largely export oriented and can fully rely on itself. [ speaking foreign language ] >> however the agriculture sector in china is still the basic needs of chinese people.
>> for example, the united states has 6 million farmers while china has more than 6 million. china and the united states are facing drastically different challenges. [ speaking foreign language ] >> but i'm glad to report to you that the two companies have biotechnology and agriculture trade and investments as well as building. [ speaking foreign language ]
>> the opening ceremony of the china u.s. and in the past 30 years jcct was established agriculture cooperation was important between our two countries and also an important platform for us to address corporate issues. >> the result of agriculture corporation is that we can bring more diverse and higher quality
products to our consumer. [ speaking foreign language ] >> in the u.s. beef exports to china are an example, made a commitment on this issue in september 22nd this year. now to give details to premiere's commitment. [ speaking foreign language ] >> so it's just my hope that our two sides will have more closer cooperation at the working
level. [ speaking foreign language ] >> i'm also really glad in the united states working out the exports of products from china -- imports from china, from china to the united states. [ speaking foreign language ] >> so it is my hope that with our concerted efforts chinese consumers will enjoy high quality beef products from the united states. american consumers were enjoying high quality poultry products
from china. so i think we can realize this and i think the future will be even brighter. thank you. >> i wish to give the floor to the vice minister from sfda. dear friends from the press, good afternoon. so it's a long day for you and i will keep my remarks short. i will only mention three things and leave you more time.
i consider the jcct current session is very successful because the two sides reached a consensus in seven areas concerning food, medicine as well as medical devices. [ speaking foreign language ] >> china and the united states can work together in a wide range of areas concerning pharmaceutical and medical devices as well as food. we have a lot of things to discuss. we also have a lot of differences to manage. [ speaking foreign language ]
>> thank you from our news agency and every day china international trade representative and during his presidential campaign mr. trump said some remarks quite worrying to us and some people are concerned and maybe they will increase or even a trade war will break out in between china and the united states. so what is the audition for china economic cooperation and trade. in china and the united states after mr. trump takes office? [ speaking foreign language ]
>> thank you for the question. as we know on november 14th he had a telephone conversation with mr. trump. during this telephone conversation he told him that cooperation is only twice between china and the united stat states. [ speaking foreign language ] >> during the past three days in which we attended the jcct as
well as a series of other events. now matter how the leadership changes in the united states, the shared interests of our two countries far outweigh our differences. our two countries enjoy a high degree of complimentary cooperation which brought benefits to our business communities and our two people. these will not change by the election and both sides have a strong desire for further cooperation. these can also not be changed. [ speaking foreign language ]
[ speaking foreign language ] >> as our trade and economic cooperation booming our interests have become more intertwined and it is quite normal for the two countries to have some frictions and differences what is important is that we need to take a cooperative approach to address our differences and reduce our suspicions and those differences that cannot be resolved for the
time being we should take a constructive approach in managing these differences well. [ speaking foreign language ] >> we would like to continue to work closely with the united states for a healthy and stable chinese and u. s. relations. >> next question. the gentleman on the front. >> thank you. >> mr. trump says he intends to declare china a currency manipulator early in his administration so if the u.s. treasury does that in january or in april what would the response from china be?
[ speaking foreign language ] >> thank you, pay close attention to the remarks made by mr. trump during his presidential campaign including his remarks on china, u.s. trade and economic cooperation and we were also close hi observing what he will do after he takes office. [ speaking foreign language ]
transaction that fails to go through, because of this, because of racial discriminat n discrimination, than they can sue, we think it is important for the court to remember you don't just have to have -- >> they said this is in the poorer community our commissions are going to be more across the board. >> if they were saying business is down. >> that was my hypothetical. >> that might be harder for them to establish the types of cases we've previously seen our brokers, developers have talked about. we think it's important for the court to all, that those cases involve plaintiffs that don't have a desegregation interest as my friend on the other side puts it. it is enough they are injured in their economic interests 37 and as the court pointed out in inclusive communities. a real estate developer is often
a good plaintiff to challenge. we don't require that they add on, that there's something like the nonprofit in havens where in addition to wanting to make money off of developing their property, they also have an interest in desegregation. >> similarly. >> perhaps -- >> please. >> go, no ahead. >> your answer, i think to the question, is that it's limited to those cognizable suits contemplated by the statute. you see that as having to do with the possession or value of the property? >> we think that the harms that flow directly from changes in property value were ones that congress contemplated both in 1968 and to certainly in 1988 after this court had already enumerated that. we don't think the city should have to establish there's been a change in the neighborhood in order to bring a suit. the fair housing act is intended
to prohibit discriminatory housing practices throughout the united states, that includes segregated communities that aren't changing. if there's discrimination. >> the city can sue based on isolated instances of discrimination? >> to the extent that the basic pitch of your position is that it affects the community as a hole, and the city has an interest in ensuring the stability of the communitieses. not that the city could enforce particular instances of the housing discrimination. >> i think it's both, i think they do have the community representing interest, but i also think to the extent they can say, we suffer a harm from this particular transaction, let's assume it's just one particular apartment complex or something. >> no, one particular home. >> i suspect that that's one where there wouldn't be that much in it to have the city bring the suit, instead of the
individual loan owner. >> i don't know if there's that much in it. >> can the city bring that or not? >> yes. they are just like the micro chip manufacturer in lex mark, whenever there's a decline on the property value on the primary victim or homeowner here, based on a corresponding decline in their tax revenue. >> the city can bring a suit in sub prime mortgage that results in a foreclosure? >> if they can say that was caused by discriminatory housing practices and it injured them, yes. that's just like the residents. they're able to say, we are injured by this. >> thank you, council. >>. >> with respect to this complaint. paragraph 186 and so on, we agree they do identify an interest. they have to becausably allege some impact on segregation in
order to survive. they haven't done that, they haven't told you whether segregation is increasing or decreasing as a result of the bank's conduct. the damages they saek are way broader than what they painted out to be, the taxes and kplaents are bad enough, the bank of america petition cites one of the complaints filed by the same council against kolb county. seeking hundreds of millions of dollars. if you adopt their theory, you would be allowing all of them to bring complaints just like this, now, we have said that if you accept their interpretation, you would be opening the door. the solicitor general says, approximate cause is somehow a limitation on that. their approximate cause test as the brief explains, eliminates the directness requirement, that's why it will be hard, and they don't have answer answer. you asked him, how to write the opinion to avoid the gardner, his answer was, look at glad
stone, glad stone has a direct reduction in property values. this cannot be a consistent theory for this court. even that language he's reading to you is only at the very end of glad stone say iing if you he a direction in property values. this is totally different. you have five steps before you even get to the reduction in property values, each of those are opportunities for intervening causes, and all the kinds of things this court elects are the reasons why we cut off liability at the first step. his other answer was to say, well, look at the congressional report. the congressional report identifies that congress was concerned with property values and, therefore, concerned with cities. that congressional report says congress is equally concerned with employers who suffered from segregated neighborhoods, employees who were fired, because the neighborhoods
suffered from blight. look at the congressional report, figure out who's harmed by the housing discrimination, you would come to the same conclusion we do, which is this is an unlimited theory of liability. if would allow landlords to sue, and justice sotomayor gardiners to soon. if you adopt on zone of interest 36-12 allows agreed persons to intervene as a matter of right in federal litigation. it empowered direct victims to sue. any city including one that's not even motivated by some of the city of miami. a direct victim's lawsuit.
possibly muck it up in any number of directions. to allow cities to come in and interfere with lawsuits filed by direct victims. >> it's hard to think -- >> our position on this is important. we're not quibbling with glad stone, it's a good law, we're not seeking to change it, they're the ones who are seeking to expand it in two directions both by taking it out of segregation and by expanding approximate cause to the sky. >> thank you, council, the case is submitted. >> we have a special web page at c-span.org to help you follow the supreme court. once on our supreme court page. you'll see four of the most
recent oral arguments heard by the court this term. and click on the view all linc, to see all the oral arguments, covered by c-span. you can find recent appearances by many of the supreme court justices or watch justices in their own words, including one on one interviews in the past few months with justices okayingen, thomas, and ginsburg. there's also a calendar for this term, a list of all current justices with links to see all their appearances on c-span, as well as many other supreme court videos available on demand. follow the supreme court at c-span.org. friday a conversation between henry kissinger and john major. bbc hosted the discussion. see it at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. we're asking students to
participate in this year's student cam documentary competition, by telling us, what is the most urgent issue for our next president and incoming congress to address in 2017. our competition is open to all middle school and high school students, grades 6 through 12. students can work alone or in a group of up to 3 to produce a 5 to 7 minute documentary. $100,000 in cash prizes will be awarded and shared between 150 students and 53 teachers, this year's dead line is january 20th, 2017. that's inauguration day. for more information about the competition, go to our website, studentcam.org. next, a look at middle east regional affairs and issues related to palestinians living in the gaza strip. this was part of the annual palestine center conference in washington, d.c..
it's an hour and 10 minutes. good morning. all right. i'd like to invite those who may be outside to maybe come, in since we're ready to start. for those of you whom i have not had the pleasure of meeting, i'm subhi ali. it's a pleasure to welcome every one of you here. i see some familiar faces on a lot of newcomers. it's a delight to have you at our annual conference, which has been an annual happening for
many years we have an excellent program for you today. but before i start that, i'd like to do some -- a few housekeeping items. first, this is instructions from the staff, and i better do it. you know if you have one of those that sing and music and classic music, beethoven, please silence it, please. i did silence mine. there will be a question and answer period after the keynote speak speaker, as well as the panels. there will be adequate time for question and answers. for the audience they can tweet
their questions t to @palestinecenter. and those on twitter, the handle is #pcconf2016. i hope every one of you has picked up one of these. it has the bioof every speaker we have today, as well as some other formation. about our programs, donors and committees and so on. i hope that nobody would leave the building without one of the progr programs this year's palestine center annual conference will
examine the current situation of palestine within overlapping, historical, sociological and political contexts. the panelists and every one of them is an expert in his or her field will examine the developments in the middle east over the past century. and the deep impact they have had on palestinian national aspirations all the way from the sykes -- i like to call it the infamous sykes speaker agreement. >> another one. we just had 99 years, november 2nd was the 99th anniversary of
the bell for declaration. and the unfortunate -- that's my -- british mandate to the arab spring. i don't know what to call it, arab spring, arab fall, all of you are familiar with that. and it's unfulfill ed promises. experts will offer decisions on washington's policy, in light of this year's presidential election. i think all of you are aware that we've just had an elocation. as well as the challenges to the growing pds.
today we will open our conference with a keynote address delivered by a friend of mine for many, many years. he's the permanent observer of the state of palestine to the united nations as well as the nonresident ambassador to costa rica. and the dominican republic. he actually joined the permanent observer mission of the plo to the united nations in 1993. as deputy permanent observe r. he also has spent some time since that time in the private
sector, and served as an adjunct professor in the political science department of the university of central florida. he holds a ph.d. in counseling from the university of akron, ohio, and has published several studies and articles about the palestinian community in the united states. i don't know who in the united states can deliver a better perspective and so on and serve as keynote better than him. please welcome me in joining him.
>> thank you very much dr. subhi. he's a good friend of mine, and always, every time we meet. whether today or a few years ago, or years before that i always have a wonderful personal exchange with him as friends. and we also have family relations, because my nephew is married to his niece. and that sort of strengthened the relationship between us further in the palestinian style. when you have people married from different families, they tend to become even closer. i am very delighted to be here.
i have seen also a few of my old friends. and i just want to commend you, dr. subhi and your board and organization of jerusalem fund for all the wonderful things you do. and advancing the cause of justice for the palestinian people. we thank you very much for your work, and of course we know that you will continue this course even if things become more complicated and more difficult. and i will always support your efforts, and i will always be with you in doing whatever i can. in order to allow you to accomplish your objective in the best possible way. it's becoming like a cliche for
palestinians. we meet at a critical time. every time we meet at a critical time. of course, next year will mark the 50th anniversary of israeli occupation to the land of the state of palestine, including jerusal jerusalem. 50 years of occupation is way too long of occupation. occupations usually are supposed to be of a temporary nature. they last for a few years and then they should end to allow for reversing the situation to the way it was before occupation. so 50 years of occupation is way too long for the palestinian people to endure. this ruthless system of oppression against the total population of the palestinian people who live in the occupied
territory. and for those also who live -- next year also we will note 70 years of nakda, the creation of the state of israel, and the catastrophe that the palestinian people went through and are still going through, including the millions of us who lived in refugee camps, particularly in lebanon, syria and jordan, and, of course. at the end of next year also. we will remember with tremendous amount of pain, the infamous bellfour declaration, in which our national homeland was promised by a colonial power to address issues in europe, at the
expense of the palestinian people on one hand and also, at the expense of jus in europe, instead of dealing with their tragedies in europe, instead of dealing with those who created the tragedies for them. but yet they decided to expel many of them, and add to their tragedies and create for us an akbar in 1948. it's a double whammy for us and for them. this is the moment, or the time for us. that we will be going through next year. which put us in a situation at the mission of the state of palestine at the u.n., myself and my team to legislate certain things, including the community on the exercise of the inalienable rights.
to conduct many identities with agencies, with countries, with civil societies. with the regional organizations to do activities with the view of ends this occupation. and the community on the exercise of the unalienable rights of the palestinian people will do all of its activities and all of you are invited to be involved in your own capacities in the way that you wish to be active under the banner of 2017 will be international year to end israeli occupation. >> so this is one piece of legislation that we will adopt at the united nations. now, one can say that the situation of the palestinian people is so difficult, and so miserable, and it is.
and occupation has been there for way too long. and there are walls, there are settlements, there is the isolation and the blockade which is illegal against 2 million palestinians in the gaza strip, east jerusalem is being severed from the remaining part of the palestinian territory. when you cut the heart from the rest of the body, the heart will not function, nor the rest of the body will be functioning. so one can say that our situation could be characterized as very miserable, very frustrating, and very difficult. but yet we, the palestinian people have a certain quality about us, that we are resilient, we do not give up. we always rise up from it the ashes and tend to articulate our strategies and tactics to continue the struggle.
and in this connection i can tell you i have bbeen personall involved to -- their strategy is to steal our land, build their settleme settlements. this is illegal. unfortunately, there is no political will in the international community. particularly in the security council to hold those who are violating international law, and committing all these crimes accountable. because, you know, we have the law so that thieves to be deterred from not stealing. yet we have the law, so that if somebody tried to break that law, to steal, then they will be held accountable.
they go to jail. in our case, international humanitarian law, which was invited specifically by europeans, in order to conduct their behaviors when they fight, that occupiers and occupied people to be following certain patterns of international law of civilization. so that there are things that the occupier can do, and things can not do. you cannot transfer part of your population to the occupied land to build settlements, that is illegal. they say that all the time in the security council. in fact, there's a unanimous position on the legality of settlements. it is illegal. it is an obstacle to peace. they don't tell us what we are going to do. meaning they tell us, we have in the books, law to say that it is
illegal to steal or to kill. and we know that there are killers and thieves, they don't tell us what they are going to do with those killers and thieves when they violate the law and here i'm referring in the case of settlements. their strategy is to create illegal facts on the ground. and without being held account ab able, there is a policy that is shielding them and protecting them from account ability. and they continue in this creation. you create illegal facts on the ground. our people are steadfast in
they're staying on the land. a shining example of what our people do every week in the village in which they struggle peacefully with pacifists from israel, in order to push the wall away from there land of their village and to lib rat -- and to push the world to be closer to the green lines. there are many examples of struggling people in the occupied territory. in our. in my field, the strategy has been okay. you are creating illegal facts on the ground. i want to create legal diplomatic, political facts at the international arena. this is why we decided in 2011 and 2012 to go to the general
assembly to legislate palestine with east germany as its capital. and we resolve the issue, whether the state of palestine exists or not. so we acquired that recognition of more than 2/3 imagine order in the international level in the u.n. to recognize the state of palestine and, therefore, to change the status to observers. that opened the door for us to join so many treaties and conventions. including international criminal court. while they're creating illegal facts on the ground, we are creating legal facts by becoming equal as a state party in so many things like the climate change, the law of the sea, the whole package of human rights,
the right of women, the right of children, the disabled, and so on and so forth. they fight us and even they accuse us of what we're doing they call it diplomatic terrorism. clear violation of the law, and they should be held accountable for it, including committing war crimes, according to the statute of the icc, if you transfer part of your civilian population and plan them in the land of the occupied territory, it's a war crime. they're committing war crimes, according to the articulation of international law, and we're committing legal civilized peaceful action by changing our status to a state, strengthening the pillars of the state in the international arena, and creating every day diplomatic
and political realities. sometimes they say to us, including one time bolton said that before he was removed as ambassador to the united nations. we hear rumors he may be coming back again to new york. when he fights against our resolution in order to convince people not to vote in favor of these resolutions, and when he is defeated, he said these resolutions are meaningless. they don't mean anything, they are just only pieces of paper. no, they're not. upholding international law is not a joke, it is something serious. while we are deepening the pillars of the state of palestine in the international arena, one might ask, what is the value of that? i can't tell you the value is tremendous. maybe for those who are not in the trenches to see. the meaning and value of
palestine as a state is marching slowly in the direction of eventually washington and tel aviv, cannot deny the fact that we exist as a nation, we exist as a state, and the land of our state is under occupation, it will be a matter of time, before they have to accept this -- when the world is excited about us, when we put ballot notice boxes and we vote as a state when the world allows us to elect a president, a vice president of the convention. these are simple steps to saying, you cannot erase the fact that the palestinian people exist and are recognized for the
great majority of nations. now, in this, we started about a month and a half ago of trying to legislate something in the security council, particularly around sentiments. because they are telling us as i said that the settlement is illegal tell us what you are going to do about it, they are not telling us what they want to do about it, we said the palestinian observer is going to tell you what we're going to do about it, we're going to legislate something to that effect. and in fact, a few days ago, we had the resolution adopted in the fourth communities of settlements. for the first time, we used language of condemnation, and we used and succeeded in negotiations with those who voted unanimously in favorite of
that union, if israel does not abide by international law with regard to settlements, then we -- then the option of considering -- that is for you to -- meaning there is a possibility of small or to be open for sanctions. they are forcing us to go that route if you are not listening to the law, you are not listening to what they are telling you to do. after a long march, particularly with the europeans, they are accepting the concept, that if you don't abide by the law then we will be possibly entertaining the concept of account ability. of course, they don't use sanctions, i know that this is a
big word and they're afraid of it but the march in that action, you have to do it one step at a time. so it is not as gloomy as one can think they might be influencing one african country, influencing in another place. but in general. they are not fundamentally succeeding in this arena. that's part of our strategy as we move forward. now, as i said on settlement, we heard very constructive consultations with all members of the security council, and we gave them a sheet of paper that constitutes the elements where we believe that should be
contained in such a resolution of course some in washington, d.c.. they will say, wait until the election, because they were thinking that hillary clinton would win, and then they were insinuating the president before he leaves, he might put on the table a draft resolution in parameters. in negotiation with them, i personally said, we have two products for you, when i went with a group of arab ambassadors, as part of our negotiation with members of the security council. here we have a draft resolution on settlements, the president is saying that he wants to preserve the two state solution. the main obstacle is settlements. so adopting a resolution in settlements would serve his objective of trying to preserve the two-state solution. if you don't like that, we have
another product for you. okay, allow our application in the security council for admission as a full member of the state of palestine to be adopted. you don't like option a, you don't like option b, tell us what you have. if you tell us after the election, you're not going to do anything, we're not going to accept had a that option. we're not going to accept wait until the trump administration to take place in january because if if we wait until that we know that that administration will tell us wait until we constitute ourself, wait until we get ready, wait, wait, wait, wait. it's none stop waiting. it's either, you put on the table something we look at or we are going to advance our plans. we send our report with all the
details of the position, with all the 15 countries on these two drafts, and we are waiting instructions from them, and i sincerely hope that they have the guts, the spine to say, proceed. where a draft resolution and settlement. and you will see, we are not looking for a veto. but we want the u.s. administration, including president barack obama before he leaves, to do something con grew end with his position and what he articulates every day, that he wants to preserve the two-state solution. we think that resolution and settlement is extremely useful. israel needs to receive a strong political message from the international community that the international community can tolerate international law and to the wish of international community. so we will see. hopefully soon something will happen and i personally
sincerely hope we can proceed in the security council and try to have a resolution adopted. if the new administration and i hope they do not show vigilance against us, more than what we've seen. if we want to start attacking us left and right, moving the capital to jerusalem and to condone settlements. nobody should blame us from unleashing all of the weapons, but to defend ourselves. we have all the weapons and we're not a small something at the united nations, we are a strong, well respected, well supported by more than 150, 160, 170 countries that vote
occasionally in favor of our resolutions, against handful of countries including israel and the united states. and they don't want to count micronesia and solomon islands and other countries that all together do not reach even the number of both of -- canada is among them, we hope that canada would change its behavior, and conduct itself in a different way. we are engaging them, if you can also engage them by all means, engage a new administration not to show more of an excessive unfair negative position against the palestinian people. they need to be as balanced as possible if they want to contribute to solving this conflict after 50 years of
occupation, after 70 years. i think they should resort into a balanced approach, and by all means, we invite all of our friends who have influence with washington or could have influence with washington, to work in this regard. for us internally, we need to put an end to our division, we need to put an end to the fact that we have gaza and ramallah. we need to have national unity. we can disagree within the house we should put an end to this division we need to have national unity. and we need, of course, to agree on details of the strategy of how we conduct ourself as we move forward, particularly after the american elections and after
we put our house in order. and also take iing into account what is happening in the middle east. i think we appreciate what you do. and you are playing a very important role in complimenting the struggle of the palestinian people on the ground and the diplomatic field of all fields, we are all complimenting each other for the same objective, of accomplishing the rights of the palestinian people. we will do more things in new york with the civil society organizations, including those in the united states of america, working in all feeds, including pbs. it was the israeli ambassador, who brought 1,000 jewish-american students to new york to combat pds.
when the journalist asked me, what do you think of that? i said, he is the one who is bringing this issue to the agenda of the u.n., and it is not the agenda of the u.n., and i said, bring it on, so that i invite our friends in pds and other others, you are welcome to come to new york. you are welcome to organize your conferences and meetings, and we will be helping you there, in order to put an end to this tragedy. i think i spoke more. i don't want you to be gloomy that we are helpless. we are doing a lot, and we will do a lot. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> we have agreed to take questions, and we have a lot of time for questions, so it was
structured that way. i believe we have time for all the questions. i'm going to take -- >> i have one question. in the united states and the united states government, always mentioned, in the last few years, i raise this opportunity clearly in one of the meetings. and you did not answer it. i want to know -- what's the difference and what will it mean by legitimate changing. >> do you want me to take a few questions and deal with them
together or what. >> maybe three or four and then respond to them together. >> make sure there's a gender balan balance. >> thank you. you raised a lot of very important questions, my question is about the relationship these days of palestine with the arab governments. you mentioned going to the arab regimes at the u.n. there's been lots of changes in the last several years of those governments, i'm wondering if you could give us an overview of where palestine stands in terms of those governments that are
trying very hard to win support in washington particularly. >> thank you very much for your time. one question. >> just one question. i know we're all talking about the new leadership here in the u.s., with president-elect trump. there's also gutierrez starting as the new secretary-general as well. how is the palestinian leadership feeling about the role he might have an active ro role. >> i work with the united
nations refugees. and from my per spigotive, it seems like there's already two states that exist in palestine is just the international community may not recognize it, i believe you're in the same position as south africa was on apartheid and india under the british rule. regardless of who does not recognize you, you do exist and if you exert your dominion as a sovereign nation, externally to other nations. i think in due time, that cloud will break, and it will also have to subside. >> these are four excellent question
questions. >> dr. mousa asked the question, theli the linguisic question. i don't profess i'm a professor of contemporary languages i believe this new language was relatively new, they are in the records that they have voted on resolutions, related to legality of settlement activities. and i believe that of course, 14 members of the security council there, they use the language illegal. the secretary-general of the united nations, ban ki-moon. and gutierrez also use illegal.
we are not yet at the final language of the text. what we need from the united states of america is to accept the concept that the security council has a role to play. and it has to legislate a new resolution on settlements. if they are on board we need to get the security council to show it's responsibility. if you translate both of them. they amount to the same thing, perhaps maybe in other languages. in english, it appears there are differences. they are too close to each other, i don't think they are synonymous with each other. again, as i said that is no need for us to engage in a linguistic
discussion. it has a role to play and it needs to deter israel from continuing on this path, it's part of the consequences of israel continuing this illegal behavior. and if we are all on board. including the united states of america, then we need to find the appropriate language that would address that issue. >> phyllis, you put your finger on something very important. we wanted as palestine to go to the security council from the beginning of the year on the question of settlements in fact, i have a tedious exercise through the -- some of them sometimes use big language, but
they have not necessarily cautioned intentions. like saying, we had resolutions in the past. why do we need to have a new resolution? but the essence of that argument is don't go to the resolution. in 1980, it called for dismantling the settlements. to the fact that we had that strong resolution, does this mean we should not go back to the security council. i don't believe that, we have to go always to the security council to show its responsibility to put israel in the corner with regard to this illegal behavior that with a view this illegal behavior has to stop. we cannot have opening doors for peace as long as this illegal behavior continues to exhibit
itself. ronald said, you know, that we could be moving into a situation similar to south africa, those who are continuing this illegal behavior are creating that one state reality which is apartheid. that has been agreed to by many, including the secretary-general of the u.n. and in the white house, in washington, d.c.. in their defense to israel, they are saying the path you continue on one state reality, you are destroying the dream of xionism of having a state that is jewish or a jewish state. therefore, you know at that time, i use some of them, others
use the argument they don't want to have a veto. as if we are the ones to decide whether a veto will be casted or not. we will use all the possible arguments to convince the city to be on board. at the end of the day, the united states is responsible for its action. whether it will allow the resolution to be obstructed or allowed. now i floated a draft resolution in march, and they said, we cannot proceed until we get authorization from the ministerial community. that committee did not meet for six months to consider the issue. when we made a huge stink in september over this issue, they
met, they authorized us to begin the consultation, now, why are arabs behaving this way? they are our brothers, we belong to that group, and they are, you know, our strategic depth. and, of course, you know. the arabs are, if they are unified to a certain extent on any issue that they are unified on the question of palestine. they exhibit this behavior, they think there are those among them, if we go to the security council in the united states. then from their perspective, as it relates to the issues as they relate to syria or iran then that is important to them, and unfortunately, when they think a
lot that way, in certain ways it is at the expense of the palestine question. now, here again, they are also floating an idea after the election, and hillary clinton wins, that president barack obama will put something more important than settlement parameters. i think that reality is not with us any more there is going to be a new person in the white house, it's not hillary clinton. what will president barack obama do before he leaves? will he allow something to be put on the table? if we do not work hard and continue with the momentum we generated, we had a very important meeting under what's the open meeting, unofficial open meeting for the security council in which they bring
experts. one is from washington, d.c., american piece now. you have to act settlements are illegal, you have to stop it. and occupation has to end. they're engaging in diplomatic terrorism. and they are now trying toville a piece of legislation to deprive him of his israeli citizenship. you're talking about fascism those cannot tolerate jew, isra
israel. they defended, sell them, and defended the lady from american peace now. will that mean that the united states of america will allow the security council to legislate something on settlement is remain to be seen. syria, yemen and by -- you know, a derivative of that. for me, i have always to keep the subject alive at the united nations. we need to continue with it, and not accept a new form of delay
that will wait until the new d administration, we need to act, and we need to act now. as the representative said. gutierrez is a smart diplomat, and he worked for the u.n. for a long period of time. very, very smart very quick on his feet i was in a meeting with all ambassadors at the u.n., and they were asking questions including palestine spoke. he was answering english and french in spanish, in portuguese, very fluent in all these languages, and he was quick. responding to the essence --
precise way. i was frustrated when i spoke, i'm an observer, i said, i speak at the end when will i speak free at last? i'm frustrated, i don't want to keep speaking it at the end then i said, what are we going to do differently. he said in front of everyone, that it will give me, nothing will give me more pleasure than celebrating the moment to see than the independence of the state of palestine, and see palestine and israel being in peace and security next to each other. i invited him to palestine, and he will visit us hopefully soon next year. let's hope we will see something good happening to palestine.
and with regard to apartheid in palestine. president carter wrote a famous book in that connection, one state solution, the extremists in israel, they keep pushing for one state reality, then they are bringing with it the virus of apartheid. if this is what, if they think that apartheid in our area will survive, they need to think again, it did not survive in south africa, i don't think it can survive in palestine, israel. >> we're going to go around. >> you have a very good statement here today. >> i'm wondering why our position is not explained to americans. is it the question of the media. the media is not very friendly, i understand that.
why do we resort to the obvious way of doing it, which is tiesing as you know, in the last two months, the israeli side had eight full pages in the new york times, is it too expensive for you to put the full page ad, to cover your remarks today. you're an excellent speaker and excellent spokesperson. we need to get the american public aware of what's going on, especially if we get a right wing regime in this country. >> what about a full page ad. put the article -- i tell you what, we can campaign for
support for a full page ad. >> we're going to have a question, and then we'll move to this side. >> what about the gender balance, i see 1, 2 -- >> i'm just answering the -- >> mark harrison with the united methodist church. during the anti-apartheid era, the u.n. had these conferences mainly pushed by african governments on ending apartheid. and white majority rule. what do you think of a committee for the inalienable rights of palestine, to have an international conference during their 50th year of the occupation, and bring international ngo's and others together.
do you think there needs to be an international conference in solidarity. ? >> thank you for being here. my name is mayim abboud. i'm from georgetown university and running a start-up called build up palestine. you talked about the weapons that we have in the u.n. and working with a lot of young palestinian activists, there is a bit of disillusionment with the u.n. structure, feeling the way the security council has veto power, because of the u.s.'s inability to make any progress in its decision making will never be able to push these kinds of fantastic resolutions
forward. what are those weapons that we have if the u.s. pushes back, and we can't push this resolution forward? thank you. >> mr. kilani. >> board member of the jerusalem fund. today donald trump said that he is going to move the u.s. embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem. i would like your views on what impact that would do, and what can be done. >> okay. last question of this round. the young lady on the left. >> my name -- i came from michigan just to attend this. i am passionate about palestinian issues. >> you're welcome 37. >> okay. >> i would like to know what
ambassador riyhad said, those secret weapons, why have they not been used before? because we are really desperate right now. and then, also, from year to year, i always attended this conference in october. and when i hear, for example, people from turkey talking about palestine, it's heartwarming. i'm just fearful year to year we're just talking, now two administrations of obama have gone by, nothing has materialized, what i would like to know is about the arab government. a few countries like uae, qatar, they have relationship with israel under the table.
and also yet i read that donald trump said that settlements are not an obstacle. could you respond to all of that? >> these are five excellent questions. >> okay. >> with regard to the question asked by my friend hashmir. there are those who think that advertising is a good thing to do to put in the new york times and washington post, and you have the resources by all means, please do it. now, for us, you know, we do things. we fight the united nations, people listen to us. we organize conferences and meetings, and we do things in order to articulate our position. can he not publish our position
everywhere. that's why we rely on friends like you and others to do -- maybe to have one page advertisement. if you want help from us, we will be delighted to do so. there is a tremendous opportunity to work. why are you here this morning? you want to do something, you are eager to do something. and this is a wonderful spirit. you can do whatever you think, it's a good idea, get the people who believe in that idea, and try to make it a reality. i think it could be done. as i said to you, from our side, we tried to sometimes publish op ed, whenever we can, or interviews in order to convey our message to the largest number of audience that we can
rea reach. the gentleman back there is mark haissan from methodist. we are on the same wavelength, we had the retrieve for the bureau of palestine committee and ending the rights of the palestine people, we are planning to organize for civil societies, activists, whomever, big international conference as we used to do in the old days, we are thinking of doing it in june, to mark the 50th anniversary, you're all invited, you, your friends, the methodists are very good and active friends, we have good relationship with them in new york city. but the activity is not only in new york, which we are not intending to do, organize as much activities in washington, in chicago, in san francisco, in all the cities, everywhere, try to mobilize all of your friends,
all the organizations, to do as many activities as possible in the year 2017, which will be the international year to end the israeli occupation. from the point of view at the u.n., we are going to have an international conference. in june. with respect to some young palestinians. when you get older, you try to balance between the heart and the brain. and i think he was right when he said, when you are young you have to think from your heart, and when you are old you think from your brain. i think i'm trying to use both of them. the young want more things, it
is good to have them. it is good they push and they push and they push more. they keep us on the right track. if we try to be complacent. and not try as had a hard as we should. i'm happy that more than half of my team -- i always tell them, challenge me, don't disagree with me. it doesn't mean that i will agree with your articulation, don't be afraid to say. therefore, serve palestine in the best possible way as we should serve palestine in the best possible way. now, have we used this weapons, i just gave you an example of our strategy, we in new york, myself and my team, we were able to influence the leadership thinking to push for that
direction. i was a junior, young diplomat in 1988 when we declared independence. i pushed for doing what we did in 2012. i was leading a minority faction. then at 1988. and we, because i felt when we declared independence in 1988, we could have gone directly to the general assembly to change our status. unfortunately, i was overruled because i was among the because i was among the minority. captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2008 captioning performed by vitac