tv Road to the White House CSPAN January 22, 2012 9:30pm-11:00pm EST
constituents and 14 year old was killed outside her home by a driver under the influence of drugs. prime minister kind metric them to talk about the case in changing the laws we can do with drunk driving. can my right honorable friend update the house on the progress of? >> i pay tribute to the work that my hoorable friend is giving out on this issue but i think it is important that we take this issue of drug drive insisted as he knows we are committed to making the drug testing equipment of able we use in playstation as soon as possible. the case he is making which is you needn equivalent law to drink driving i do think it is one that has got a great strength. we are examine a close in government, including we need to look at whether we and opportunity in the second legislative session to take forth the measures i know he'll be campaigning for very hard. >> mr. speaker, does the prime minister share my concern that yesterday's ruling by the european court of human rights cannot b deported? that if he does, will he agree
to initiate all party discussions focused not on rhetoric about the human rights act t how in practice this court could operate more so the rights of respected of the safety of the public is always pamount to? >> i agree wholeheartedly with what the right honorable gentleman has said. i think this judgment is difficult to understand, frankly, because huge efforts have been going to by the british government, by this one and the one that he served in to have a deportation with assurance agreement with jordan to make sure people wouldn't be mistreated. in this case the european court of human rights has found that he wasn't going to be tortured but they were worried about the process of the court case in jordan. it is immensely frustrating that i do think a country like britain that has a long tradition of human rights should be able to deport people who meet -- who mean us harm. that principle is either important or not is kind of strong rhetoric about it. i'm going to strasburg next week
to make the argument that as we are chairing the council of europe this is a good time to actually make reforms to the european court of human rights and make sure it ask a more proportionate way. >> thank you, mr. speaker. [shouting] on the toy of march 2010, a two and half year old boy was kidnapped from his home and taken to thailand by his mother. six months later his father finally tracked him down in a remote village on his son couldn't speak had his teeth broken and bruises all over his body. he believes that they' not got him back then, he would have een killed each year in in the u.k. over 500 children are kidnapped in similar circumstances. will the prime is to meet with me and his fatherwho has a charity called abducted angels and is in the gallery today to discuss with the government can do to help pants of adopted children? [shouting] >> my right honorable friend is actually right to raise this
case but it is something and apologies, and any parent can't help but be come a chill to the bone about what happened to this poor boy. i think it's vital we put in place the best possible arrangements. as he knows the child explication and on my protectn system, that will be put into the national crime agency. i very much hope he will be up to legislate for the crime agency and make sure it is properly resourced because as he said it's vitally important when these appalling acts happily get on top of them right away. the early time, it is vital in saving these children. >> dennis skinner and. >> when there's a prime minister dasher went as the prime mr. expected to cross examine by the letters of inquiry? doesn't he agree that the british people deserve an answer to why he appointed one of murdoch's top lieutenants andy coulson, to the heart of the british government?
[shouting] >> i will be delighted to appear at the leveson inquired whenever i am invited. and i'm sure other politician will have exactly the same view and i would answer all the queions when that happe but it's good to see the honorable gentleman on such good form. i often say to my children, no need to go to the national history museum to see a dinosaur. come to the house of commons. [laughter] >> order. in order. >> you have been watching prime minister's questions from the house of commons. you can watch it again on sundays at 9:00 p.m. eastern and pacific on c-span. watch any time asked c-span.org where you can find video of past prime ministers questions and
other programs. prime minister cameron continue to focus on the economy and thursday when he outlined his conservative party's plan in this debate. this is about 30 minutes common and and it includes questions from the audience. >> thank you very much for that introduction. the chechen commanders great to be here. i think this is a brilliant innovation. you take relatively unused space in central urban locations and make it available for entrepreneurs and socialist bernard's and starbucks. this is absolutely a key facility for people who have a great idea and want to build it into something but can staff and some believe was office. this is a great idea for the government to take up unused space that we have so that we can help build more osbourne oriole and social of memorial society that we all want to see. but these are difficult times.
we have to deal with the legacy of the deficit and the debt. the eurozone has bee deep and continuing trouble. and yesterday unemployment rose again. across europe economies of stalled. here in britain this is an active government sleeves rolled up, doing everything we possibly can to get our economy moving. the biggest work programs as the 19,373,000,000 people, a massive drive, major initiatives on regional growth, infrastructure, enterprise many people are questioning not just palin when we will recover but the whole way in which our economy works. so when our economic challenge starts with stealing with the debt it must not end there. we must aim higher than just the storms that are affecting the
international call of because i believe that i am just this current diversity. we must aim to build a better economy, one that is truly fair and worthwhile. my argument today is this. we will build a better economy by turning back on the free-market. we will do it by making sure that market is fair as well as free. well of course, there is a role for government to regulation, intervention the real solution is more enterprise, more competition, more innovation. in this debate the kind of economy that we want to see position is very clear. i believe that open markets and free enterprise of the best imaginable force for improving human wealth and happiness. they are the engine of progress. they generate the enterprise and innovation that lifts people out of poverty and gives people an opportunity. and i would go further. where markets work open markets
and free enterprise actually promote morality. why? because they create a direct link between contribution and reward between effort and the outcome. the fundamental basis of the market is the idea of something for something an idea that we need to encourage, not condemned. so we should use this crisis of capitalism and to improve marketsut not undermine them. i believe conservatives in particular are well-placed to do this. because we get the free-market. we know its failings as well as its strengths. no true conservative has a net you believe that all politics and politicians have to do is stand back and let capitalism representative. we know that every difference in the world beten a market that works and one that does not come markets can fail. uncontrolled globalization can
accountability for the east india company. this is the same spirit of responsibility that helped drive the campaign against the slave traders and the appeal which forced up the price of food, and they began to set working conditions. it is true great campaigns for reform drew strength, but social responsibility watching over business correcting market failure, recognizing obligations have been part of the conservative condition from the start, and my position has been about renewing that commitment and long standing tradition. tradition. corporate social responsibility and environmental responsibility has been constant themes in the arguments i've made and policies have developed. soon after i was elected leader and said that we should not just stand up for business, but also we should stand the two big
business when it was in the national interest to do so. three years ago i argued that previous government turbo s. and i turned a bright day to coorate excess, while we believed responsible capitalism and government would make it happen. with the second principle, popular capitalism is just important as the first social responsibility. we need to open up markets. we need to get more people engaged hme popular capitalism, which is what you see when he was at the space of the health care today today in new zealand. conservatives have always believed in ownership ciety. a theme has been the ambition of building a nation of shareholders and savers of homeowners. mln champion mr. homeownership giving people an asset of their own. or thatcher did the same of privatization with the right to buy canceled ads. in two years ago i called for a new popular capital one that we
recognize what's going to a capitalism in which makes people make something of themselves, to get a good job, own a home started business. today this mission of improving markets and ensure it the airfare as well as fee and for many principles of social responsibility and genuinely popular capitalism should have three things that is sorry. for us, we need to be clear about the specific mistakes of the last decade. second, we need to put the right rules and institutions in place to correct them. and third and i think this matters more than anything else is we need to open up enterprise and opportunity so everyone has a chance to participate and benefit from a genuine market economy. we need to boost competition, back enterprise, encourage adventurous spirits and challenge the status quo. that is how we'll build a a more worthwhile economy. so first, what went wrong?
the last government claimed to have got rid of movement. what really happened? did it get out of control clicks this series is if you like a series of lethal imbalances in our economy between north and south, financial services and manufacturing between the people that huge awards at the top. everyone else seemed to get left out. the truth is the last government made some data for fast and packed with the. it encouraged the economy because it needed to pay for spiraling welfare costs and a very much top-down intervention state. it tolerated market failure because at heart he didn't accept the markets would be made to work poperly. heeemed frightened of challenging vested interest, believing too often that the interest of big business were always one of the same as those with the economy as a whole. all this left us with a level of public spending we could afford
any model economic growth that would work. now i understand why this has made any people totally disenchanted with markets even angry. far from abolishing boom and bust, what we had is the biggest boom and the biggest baddest where everyone has to share the data. and thanks a while, only a few seem to get a share of the profit. too many people found they couldn't count on their savings growing. they couldn't afford to buy a home. they wondered how they would pay their bills and old-age. in the city kumble should've been a powerhouse of competition and creativit became instead a byword for financial visit tree that left the taxpayer with other risk in a fortunate few with all of the rewards. so instead of a popular capitalism, we ended up with an unpopular capitalism. so the next question is what needs to change? my answer is we need to change the way the free market works not just up the free market from
working. we need to reconnect the principles of risk, hard work and success with reward. when people take risk with their own ideas, their own energy, own money, when they succeed in the contested market and anyone can come and knock them off their perch at any time, we should celebrate entrepreneurs succeed and create wealth in get rich in that way. we should support business leaders who earn great rewards for building great businesses, for doing great things for their come to me for conomy and for society. they should be a probable functioning market for talent at the top of business. and that will inevitably mean that some people will earn great rewards. but tht is away from what we've seen in recent years with he bonus culture, particularly in the city has got out of control with the link between risk hardware, success and reward has
been broken. this is not the politics of anything. the government of the bank of england reminded us this week, excessive undeserved or mrs. reduced funding that's debatable for small businesses. lurch rumors for failure and companies are suffering become even less is left the customers for shareholders. so next week the business secretary will set out a detailed proposals on executive pay, including any necessary legislation to follow. so there is a need for new rules. but we shoulbe clear about what we do most to bring about true responsibility. we need to make the market work and will do that by empowering shareholders and using the power sector. see as well. that is why i welcome this week's decision by fidelity worldwide to add their crs for better policing of boardroom pay. it's responsible action to make markets work in the thread that
runs to his government. regulation is part of it, but again the last government that regulation of wrong way around. small companies were often strangled in red tape of the banks were allowed to live with we need to turn the tables of this are acting to make banks for the people of the firms who rely on it as implementing the vickers report, separate investment banking for retail banking. we would ensure banks are properly capitalize should people buy investors not by taxpayers. we're completely overhauling financial services regulation, abolishing the apartheid system and putting in place system that will rk and protect the consumer, were fundamentally reviewing the finance commission gave to strikea balance between risk and reward and private sector. and almost busting up in the co collusion between big business and big government out of public-sector contracts come a market worth 150 billion pounds a year.
none of this should mean more regulation. it means less not better regulation. we need strong frameworks that people can understand what am must in effect give tape. that's a life behind the new rule that the chancellor is examining, which will make the tax cuts and other, not more complex this stuff abuse at the same time. at the end about this, this government will have reduced regulation, not increased it. the third part of the mission to improve pockets and make them various illustrious enterprise and opportunity. capitalism will never be genuinely popular in the savings opportunities for everyone to participate and benefit. of course this means a greater emphasis on equality of opportunity. you can never create a fair economy if there are people who are automatically excluded from it through poor ucation. or if there are people who
encouraged that the only way to live their lives is to depend on state handouts. people need thcapacity to succeed. but he said his government has made the education revolution a priority with the academies, preschool, richter come exam and tolerance of failure as we saw this week with the abolition of the ij you can have a score less than good being called satisfactory. we are shrinking the funding system in education and vapor of the poost with a premium that means disregarded pupils get more. so every time a child or preschool walks into a school, that school knows they'll get more money teaching that people must missile will get help to rn their lives and prospects around. in an age where we have to cut public spending, were actually investing more in early years. and we'rintervening comprehensively and family is failing to help children who otherwise look at a poor start
in life. the popular capitalism also means believing in what i call the insertion economy, where we support the new, innovative and bold and give a chance for thousands upon thousands in a country who aren't envious yet but want to be come whose ideas and energy and enterprising ambition have crucial spring rolls, intelligence, ingenuity energy. i believe witnesses in the business potential in you can see it a few yards from where i'm standing. we need to have a theory that says this is opportunity for review. i admire almost went than anything the bravery of those who turn my back on security of the regular wage to follow their dream and started from any. if you take a risk on a quicker job, create google or facebook could wind up a billionaire and if you take a punch, message your money in a hugely risky set
up and made a fortune. let's also recognize people who take risks, to succeed the first time, who often find the first investment of the first business failed, doesn't succeed but who persevere. we have to recognize that as a process leading to success, not a failure in itself. they want to see it happen and encourage it. but if i were taking a whole series of steps. for improving entrepreneurial beliefs of the founders of come these get a bigger slice of the gains they made. it's why we want to be entrepreneur thesis of the best and brigtest would-be entrepreneurs around the world and start their business right here in the u.k. if i was implemented some of the most diverse texas and as for early-stage investment of any developed economy inextricably launching a new campaign to start up with, helping people take that a step in the business for themselves it is a basic truth that if
people have a stake in business they will support its growth and sharing his success. but the reality is even as our country has grown richer, participation has actually shrunk. yes we are boosting shareholding by giving tax of two people invest in useful businesses. for the olympic year 2012, were taken another step that hasn't had much easier. we are effectively abolishing catal gains tax for people who this year are prepared to have a go and invest in a startup. i don't believe we should start there. we need more shareholders, more homeowners, march but her spirit that is why we are real degrading three to buy or cancel a home in transforming the failing housing rocket. as the deputy prime minister said monday, we need to encourage different models of capitalism. what more employees of a much more direct stake in the success of their come to me. this is an issue i have long cared about.
back in 2007 i established the conservative cooperative movement which now has 40 conservative mps as members. any government where we are providing new ways for public-sector workers to create mutual said on a stake in the firssuccess come with employee led mutuals not delivering on the civilian pounds worth, i think it's right to take further steps because we know that breaking monopolies, encouraging choice opening up new forms of enterprises not just safer business, it's also the best way of improving our public services too. there's over 12 million co-op meers in the u.k. it is if you like a vital bunch of popular capitalism. rate other too many barriers in the way to extending and improving that record. there are over a dozen separate identity pieces of legislation that cost and complexity to the process. day announced they will be brought together and simplified
and a new cooperative bill that will be putting before parliament. i wonder in these difficult economic times to achieve more than just paying dn the deficit and encouraging growth. i want these times to lead to a more socially responsible and genuinely popular capital one in which the power of the market and obligations of responsibility really come together. one in which we improve the market by vacated fare as well as free in which many more people get a stake in the economy and the share of the rewards of success. that is a vision of a better or worthwhile economy we are building, an economy where people who work hard every words that are fair and true conservatives of the world. an economy in their destiny because they started their own business or shareholders in the company they work for or indeed part of a cooperative an economy river and has a chance to build assets come to pass on links the next generation.
that is how we make markets work for all of us, to spread wealth, freedom and spread opportunity. thank you very much indeed for listening. [applause] thank you very much. we've got time for some questions.óo let's start with james alexander this evening.éñññ÷ >> by miisters james alexander, and bbc.??3ñ? ? you have to present the proceeds of poorly on a treadll andg owned banks for million dollarsx businesses click >> the short ansr is yes. first of all distorting the "financial times" this morning as i'm afraid to say tht accurate. there s been no meeting of the remuneration committee at the bank of scotland and so no decision has been made. for our part as major shareholders in the business, first of all we say we are repeating what we did last year
and restricting bonuses and all state owned yanks, restricting the cash element for 2000 pounds. you might ask why there's any bonuses that all. i argue there's people working hard in the business' bank managers tylers for junior employees leaking their target doing my best try to restore portions of their bank and i think it's right there should be a small cash bonus available for those people/year. that would apply to anyone at the top of the organization as well as anywhere else. in terms of the broader question of the chief executive of the rest as i've said is there's no meeting of the remuneration committee. that to be a proper process. if there a bonus will be a lot less than it was last year. but the process s set up should be followed in the proper way. david shipley and from the daily
mail. >> thank you, prime minister if you agree it is what are you going to do about it? >> i think it's right there is a proper process to be followed for some enough disorder. there is a committee in terms of honors that exist and that will now examine this issue. i think it is right that it does so and there's a proper process. obviously take into account the financial services authority report, which i think is material and import because of what he says about the failures of what would amount into his response will not investigate. they should do the work rather than the prime minister himself. for herself. christya. >> thank you, prime minister. anyone watching the speech today might ask him he can act on a company of which he rode 83% are your words noteworthy a? are ultimately meaningless.
>> i have that day. as you just heard, there will be a 2000-pound cash limit how many bonus for anyone whether they are at the top of the cab near the bottom o it. that is the action of this government took last year and the action we asked rbs to take again this year. as for the rest of the process the review duration committee needs to be, discussions need to be held, decision made but clearly the british government is a major shareholder and has a major interest message is heard has a pretty clear view. >> thank you, prime minister. you are right to comment on the good tradition of corporate responsibility in this country. w ó i sometimes they can experience it is rather patronizing kind of business leaders how to run a business. i think we could argue that we could tell them a bit more about
how to motivate staff rather than ethical and sustainable business. so the practical two hopeful suggestions number one. how about encouraging come needs to take charity leaders onto their board? number two with the bankers take the bonuses. tell them to give it to charity or invest in social enterprises.8 >> some great ideas there. let me just remind the principle behind what you're saying is entirely ready.÷÷÷÷÷ for too long inthis country, social responsibility was seen as some in that businesses should sort attack on to an otherwise third street port profit-making model and now i began to shed a bit of money to this charity or that social enterprises to. that's completely the wrong mode the nakedness model for seems like a hundred years. but business status should actually incorporate all of
social responsibility. the way it treats its customers, its staff, the weighng gauges in the world in the busisses sometimes they do think you're taking this a bit far, i could actually go sit in the classroom with young childreand see what their aspirations are for the sort of businesses that want to work for consume for, consumer products by, deal with, and all the rest of it. you will soon find out that responsibility is something that should be core to the whole way they do business. from that flows consequences and one of which you think your first idea is saying to businesses as you look at who you want to have on your board actually the awful word mainstreaming, but will save would help if you have someone who really understood the social enterprise what social responsibility is all about. the second suggestion i bonuses is also a good one. the point the governor of england made with importance,
which is links to sites pay out more in bonuses or pay out more in dividends, they are going to effectively be reducing the capital base on which they commit their decisions. i think we all know one of the problems in our coutry today is actually dficulty of getting hold of bank lending. that is why the government has taken an intervention, his strong start to the murdoch agreement, which was my initiative is fitting that the banks of a book you want some predictable rules tax and what is going to happen in terms of banking. you are only going to get that if in return you actually set //ñ out to the sort of funding are doing to businesses large and/ñw/ñw small. /ñw i think it is important that we have done that and actually those targets are on course to be met. maybe one or two more from the press. the bst can defend themselves in wakulla today. >> thank y, prime minister.
their announcement today of a cooperative bill is very very welcome. it's an historic decision that would clean up a fragment dated classic process that will be good for cooperative business. over 12 million members of metrical within individual shareholders in deed in the u.k. this year has been declared to the united nations vis-à-vis the international year of cooperatives in the united nations asks government to review their framework. i think the u.k. is the first country in the world to get that commitment under way. i wonder whether you have a message for the 12 million numbers of cooperatives large and small up and down the country this year. >> first of all thank you for telling the ended in an international obligation of which i wasn't entirely aware. i'm very grateful for that. it is important to clear up a lot and make it easier and
encourage creation of new -ops large and small, clearly trying to cut the paperwork is a sensible thing to do. i think my message just keep on doing what you're doing. i think we want toee a spread of different business models, not just in the private sector but the public site. isoing a lot of work to encourage public services is more appropriate in some rather than others. i think trying to give people a greater sense of ownership in what they are doing is hugely important. if you ask people about what it is that makes them satisfied in work and happy at all the rest of it, it is obviously partly collect good to your job security, but it's also whether you feel you have a real stake in what you're doing. i have often had my leg pulled pork talking about happiness and the rest of it they think it is
important. i think there's a growing understanding that it is about the control you have come to influence you have come as setting your work as wel as vital themes of pay and conditio. >> , no, the fact. >> prime minister, just go back to is you just described the out-of-control bonus culture. what about the nonstate owned banks, which as you'll note the vast majority of the city. you have no control over them. he's got a few opportunities today to exert any moral suggestion they should be paying their bonuses to charity. you are totally powerless over goldman sachs. >> i don't accept that. what the government is doing is recognizing, but we can't
legislate for the pay level in every business in every company in the country. where you can do is make this market for top pay work properly. it's quite clear it's not workinproperlyí today. -- india saw 49% increase in the value of pay and the ftse top management, but she only saw a 4% increase in the proceed. as i said in my speech, rewarding success has become big. >> was a date and morality to mass., are you prepared to use a state to limit the power and influence of big capital? >> the answer to that is a straight yes. if you have an example where despite ascii participants in the market to exercise responsibility they don't clearly you have to intervene with the law. no conservative believes that amica without law. there's all sortof practices you have to ban.
for instance, insider trading or what haveyou. obviously a conservative hopes that she'll have a max on extent of responsibility allowing you to have a minimal extent of law whereas i would say they tend o believe you need a maximum extent of law because we can't ever trust anyone to behave responsibly in any way. let me encourage responsibility when possible a much as they were necessary. the good example to prove am somebody consistent was yesterday when i was asked about on line and television gambling advertising. i basically believe that kinsley is an industry that should be licensed. it should be legal but he must behave responsibly. if you want, the government has to think again. i'll be having meetings last week about the issue of how to advertise to children and issues around commercialization and sexualization of childhood. again, there should be a strong
repeal for behaviors from business of the things are handled properly in the marketplace. if they can't be, you have to go to rules and regulations. that is solid now. thank you thank you indeed for comingcuqú on. thank yoi can to the house for having us. thank you very >> next, nicolas sarkozy talks about economic conditions in france and europe. at 11:00 q&a with diana west. then, another chance to see david cameron talking about the state of his countries economy first at the house of commons, then during a conservative party debate. c-span3 [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] emanuel cleaver is one of the
participants. michael steele, and j.c. watts. that is live tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. in his new year's message to the nation nicolas sarkozy talked about the future of france's economy. his speech comes less than 100 days before france's election. one week after standard and poor's downgraded the credit rating. in his speech, he said his government's economic policy would not be dictated by credit agencies. this is just over 45 minutes.
>> ladies and gentlemen congressman and congresswoman ladies and gentlemen i wanted to come here in a city and in a region that has represented for centuries the excellence of industrial and trade tradition in france. i wanted to wish a happy new year to business people in the second economic region in france. the unprecedented crisis distracting of france, europe, and the world forces us to look for new ideas.
i would like to convince you ladies and gentlemen, fellow citizens that this new world which, with its new century's being born in front of our very eyes, we cannot refute. the world is here. it is the way it is. the chinese indians, the brazilians want to exceed economic and social progress. who could blame them? we are 7 billion people on this planet, never again will the world be the way it is to be with four or five countries that
were in the first tier, the united states, france, great britain. everything was managed by these countries. the world has changed, and deeply so. and, perhaps, the idea that is the most complicated to understand is that in order to keep the france that we love, in order to preserve the social model that we love, we must change. that is the paradox. that is the problem. some are saying we have to refuse globalization. they are lying. imagine the solitary refusal of 65 million french people.
imagine that this refusal will impress 7 billion people on the planet. it is as if we would tell our children you are doing badly at school, refuse the system, work less, he will be better off. you can imagine the chinese, the indians, the brazilians, very impressed by our solitary and arrogant refusal. who will pay for this? those of us who are the least educated who of the weakest and most vulnerable. others are saying, we have to refuse europe. they are lying too, and deeply so. fellow citizens, we belong to a continent that for centuries
and even to the last century was the theater of barbaric war. murderess wars. your own parents lived do that. your grandparents pay dearly for the war. it was not in asia, it was in europe. in europe, we kill each other. in europe, we exterminated people. just in the last century. europe is the most beautiful human conclusion and construction at ever imagined in the service of peace. europe is a treasure. europe has not done everything right, but he were guaranteed to you, to us, peace. if we let europe unravel it
would mean our continent would be back in a situation that the parents and grandparents -- that your parents and grandparents lived through. think about this. france, alone, isolated, the think it would count for anything in the world? france separated from its european partners, the think anyone would listen to us? it would mean the disappearance of a large part of our industry. others are saying, we have the solution, all we have to do is close our borders. they are lying. a few minutes ago i was in a
factory in that area. three-quarters of its production is sold abroad. the think if we closed our borders, we could keep on selling -- do you think if we close our borders, we could keep on selling to other countries? that is not the solution. the solution strategy, there is only one, effort. innovation training. to be better than the others in order to keep our place in the world. there is no other way. the easy way is close to us. the only possible way is that one. because of that we have had to
take decisions that have been determined by nature, if a decision is not difficult, it is not a decision. if a degree does not give you any jobs, it is not a degree. if a decision is not difficult it is not a decision. if a choice is not complicated it is no choice. i wanted to tell you fellow citizens that in this difficult period of the last three years for our country europe, the world, french people showed enormous courage. before i was president, i was told, do not even imagines universities could be autonomous. we will never make it. of course we would never make it. we never made it before. the minister had to step down.
if in your corner is only the rivers, you will never make it. unless you try to drive around the globe perhaps. [applause] one woman alleged that reform. today -- one woman led that reform. today, your children will go to universities that are completely autonomous. this is not a question of ideology, it is a question of thinking is there one university that is worth its salt that is not autonomous? none. all we had to do was to hold on resist and to end it is ugly practice in our country where government after government would yield not yield to people who had the right claim but to
those who wheel and the loudest. that practice -- who were yelling the loudest. that practice is over. you can demonstrate. you can protest. that is democracy. those who were blocked were more heard than the ones who suffered. recently, here, in this region, in this very city, i said that the government will no longer accept that a holiday of french citizens would be hijacked by a minority. french citizens have understood that. we had to face the retirement regime reform a very sensitive
subject. i was told, it is difficult. it is not popular. they are always very good advisers to tell you not to take any risk. they do not understand that the worth of all the risks in a moving world is to take no risk at all. [applause] out or retirement regime was about to be bankrupt. 15 million people are retired in france. for 1.5 million, we had to borrow their retirement money from banks. every four years of life expectancy is one year longer. if we do not work longer, who is
going to pay for this retirement regime? we made this choice at the beginning of 2010. we had nine national demonstrations with a large number of people. we did not yield. we did not backtrack. what was at stake was the essential. french people understood, french people have accepted. i bet you that in the next years, nobody is going to repeal this reform because it was a must. it was indispensable. this was not from the left, the right, the minority, the government it was a sensible reform. i prefer to have to face the fact that the french people are
not have the red again to see them angry when they see that after a long -- that the french people are not happy rather than to see them angry when they see that after a long life of work, there is no retirement. is there one person among you who would like for france to be like grease that's what you like for france -- to be like greece? would you like for france to be in the same situation as spain portugal, italy? what happened in these countries? they did not make it difficult choices that they would have made it when they should. when you have a difficult decision, you take it later, it is too late. people suffer more. in portugal, they are thinking
of cutting by 25% wages in public service. retirement went down in spain italy, greece. did you know that? these countries are facing huge difficulties with the violence, because when difficult decisions had to be taken, they were not taken. on monday, i was in spain. unemployment crippled. it is now 23%. france thanks to the retirement reform, made a choice that preserves the future. i observed that people who say they are going to repeal the reform are more discreet nowadays.
there is progress. even if it is not sufficient yet. [applause] a few days ago people panicked. i am talking about the political world and the media world. all of a sudden, standard and poor's, a ratings agency, became the absolute preference for people who until now did not even think existed or criticized it. but, now because that agency started bad mouth in france, it had to be the truth. it was pretty indecent. men and women who look like they
were happy about it, they were happy about what that agency had decided. that was on friday. on monday, another agency, twice as big, said exactly the opposite. all of a sudden, it was positive for france. what the agency said on monday counted less than a negative assessment of the agency on friday. the only solution is to keep cool, keep your distance, show courage, to make decisions. what counts is not with the agencies are saying, the agency's are not deciding on the policies of our government. what counts is how it is too high. we spend too much.
we have to cut the deficit. whatever the agency will say. whatever the friday agency thinks, we have to cut our spending. let's not be dramatic. let's not minimize the the the situation. that is the reason why -- minimize either the situation. that is the reason why we have decided not to replace one at of two retirees in the civil service. for the first time, a government reduced the number of its civil servants, 160,000 over five years. we have to do even better. france needs its civil servants. who can tell. we are going to hire more of the. -- you.
they are lying. lies and more lies. if the government reduces the number of its civil servants but local governments if they hire half a million public servants it will not work. the taxpayer is the same at the local level, at the regional level, and at the central level. it is the same taxpayer. [applause] there is no different. whoever we are whatever our responsibility we have to be accountable about the deficit of the country. the government the health system, local government, that
is the reason why we are going to receive local officials, to work with them we are going to see how everyone can take part in reducing the deficit. is it impossible? why would it be impossible? in spain, a few weeks ago a man was the head of the government, he was a socialist. he taught to the one who was going to follow him, right wing, to tell him that together we have to focus on the golden rule. they showed the example of politicians who could put the interest of spain above the interest of the parties. they voted together.
the golden rule is neither on the right or the left. what is the golden rule? it means that over one of the legislature, we have to have a balanced budget. is it impossible? in germany the former chancellor, a socialist talk to the daed to madame merkel before she became chancellor. he proposed a reform. they adopted the golden rule. it is a sensible rule. don't you think there are enough reasonable people around, and the reasonable woman -- enough reasonable women to understand we are going to go through our responsibilities? our jobs are not for ever.
our national interest should always be above the partisan interest. what is possible in germany spain, should we give up in france? why? what would be that logic? i know people of high quality in all the parties of france who could all put aside their party. this is hurting us when that national interest is at stake. yesterday was the minister -- with the minister and prime minister we talk to the labor union -- talked to the labor union. i want to pay homage to the unions and the employers' associations. europe is in a crisis. france is in a crisis. it is very normal that people
who have union responsibility and the government talk to see what needs to be done in order to fight against this cancer which is unemployment. everyone gave their opinion. of course we do not agree on everything. how could that be? we have talked freely. we agreed on emergency measures. within 10 days, with the prime minister and the government, we are going to take decisions that are even more important. i would like to explain the context. first, to those who said, let's not do anything because the presidential election is coming. i knew it was coming up. i can count up to five, you
know? i am not talking about what comes after that. i had been elected for five years. if we could only take decisions when there is no election, we would take decisions. we have elections every year. let's not touch retirement because we have regional elections. let's not talk about regional reforms because we have municipal elections. let's not talk about universities, we have county elections. let's not talk about the economy, we have presidential elections. should we start again? we have one every year. it comes back every four, five, and six years. this is not a relevant argument. i will add, ladies and gelatin -- gentlemen imagine our fellow citizens unemployed. they did nothing wrong.
the factory, the company they sell half of what they used to sell. this man, this woman which, all of a sudden is unemployed. do you think it is normal to tell them, wait four or five months presidential elections are coming? four or five more months to be unemployed, it is a tragedy. it means to which, it means suffering. after, we tell them, we have to get ready now. then there is the congress election. then a summer holiday. then back to school. do you think this is reasonable? to tell to the 120,000 new unemployed people, we do not have time to decide.
he is suffering. let us do our business. let us keep dealing with the elections, primaries, election. but be assured, we will make a decision when we have time to read this is not acceptable. i have been present -- when we have time. this is not acceptable. i have been president for five years. i am asking the government to take the decision. what decision? what of the problems? let me tell you one thing. we have not tried everything against unemployment, yet. when people say they have tried everything, it is because they say there is nothing else to do. when there is nothing to do, you encourage all the irresponsible people who want to thrive on fear anxiety suffering not
accurate, but use it. -- cure it but use it. we are all democrats. if we think everything has been tried, let's il to the populists. -- yield to the populists. if we were to renounce any decision what can we tell the people who were suffering? why would they not turn to the people who were yelling the loudest because they are angry? that is how we have to make decisions. i will tell you. -- i will tell you, i am not a fatalist. if, during my life i head except it fate, i would never have run for president.
-- i had accepted eight, i would never have run for president. you do not vote for a president so he gives up, so he tells there is nothing to be done. i will never be that man. there were people who were suffering. if they see that the decide it tells them, i cannot do anything, what suffering, what this bear? -- despair. all i have to do is open the newspaper, i would understand how much more we have to do. fate, renouncing that is not possible. you, what are your problems? we tried to solve a lot of problems the professional tax
the labor tax tax holidays for research compare it to the polls,-- comparitivity polls. what can we do for you? there are four sectors where decisions must be taken. i will explain. the crisis created at suffering. the crisis also allows the to excel it necessary changes. the crisis -- toallows you to accelerate necessary changes. the crisis allows you to think outside of the box. that is where we are now. there are some extremely difficult subjects that are
going to create debate. let me tell you we will not be immobile. the first topic is a word, which is usually not known by the elite, but which is in the brain of all workers outsourcing this word, offshore oring is not felt by all our citizens the same way. when you are high on valletta, it means new markets. it means you can open new sectors. when you are on the bottom, it means the closing of the factory, the loss of your job, the impossibility to live. the problem is not the chinese the indians, or the brazilians, the chinese is over the last 15
years, france has lost market share in the eurozone. we must like in the cost of labor so that france remains -- leighton -- lighten the cost of labor so that france remains a land of production. [applause] i want to tell you how absurd it would be to bet on services and not bet on industry. the industry is the forefront. if your industry disappears, the services are going to follow suit. france must remain a land of production. how can france remained a land of production if the cost of
labor is higher in france then it is next door in germany? of course, the question is not to bring our social model down, it is the others who will increase their social model. our entire social model, our entire production system, is based on taxing labor. if we do not produce that, the cost of labor will make us run a huge risk, outsourcing will go on. in 15 years, france has lost half a million industrial jobs. fellow citizens, this is a reality. we must think about that. if we keep that way we will not have a single factory. the day we have no more factories, we will have no
service either. the priority is to reduce the cost of labor. we cannot create deficit we have to find alternative income iss. you can have whatever idea, but you also have to understand one thing, the question is not to know whether you want this tax or the other one the vat the only question is, you want to stop faye -- do you want to stop offshoring? this is the only question. if you leave a company you want to create companies concord newmarket. that is normal. what is not normal -- conquer new markets. that is normal. what is not normal is france is
losing all of its factories. just imagine france is the last importers of automobiles. this can go on. we have to take strong decisions. second also difficult complex, within our companies, can we talk? can we negotiate? can we talk about the work week? can we exchange flexibility for more work? one word, should france have the same competitive in the agreements that germany chose over 10 years ago? that is a question. it is not a question of
imitating what the others are doing, but my duty is to see what are the solutions that work in other countries. the solutions that did not work, very often, we adopted them here. they did not work here. can we have a free dialogue within the company? agreements between workers and bosses in a company, is it stronger than the log? -- law? can we imagine a france that would be like germany where workers could talk freely within the company and discussed? can you imagine what a change that would mean? these are the topics we mentioned. third remark, why are there more
young unemployed people in france than anywhere else, especially in germany? in france, there is a lot less training. there is a lot less mix of studies and work. all that we need to do is classical education, vocational training, it is not good enough. it is not high enough. if you choose vocational training, you have three times as many chances to get a job as when you have a general education. i looked at the figures. i am not talking about small companies, i am talking about companies that have over 250 employees. 1 out of 2 has less than 1%
trainees whereas the losses they have to have four%. -- 4%. that situation has to stop. and their causes prefer to pay the fine rather than hire a trainee -- companies prefer to pay the fine rather than hire a trainee. i will not accept it. in different industries at the situation is different. in manufacturing there are more trainees. if you look at our neighbors in germany, there are as many training in banking and insurance as there are in manufacturing. our reality has been changed. i will no longer accept it. how to finance the economy?
we are in a situation that is extremely difficult. i will summarize it in one word. when things of going well, we are granting loans to everybody especially people who do not need loans. when you want to finance the real estate bubble or the internet bubble, what is the word? credit crunch. credit was abundant. all you have to do is look at a piece of land. you would find people to loan you money. then the crisis arise. we are in a situation where the central bank loans at 1% and, in the evening, the banks bring the money back.
you barrault 41% -- borrow for 1%. this will not go on for ever. at the same time, you have company owners who said, i need a new machine. i have a project. how can i increase my equity? i need equity. we have decided that what we did for small and medium enterprises, we are going to create industry banks in order to loan funds to people who want to invest in growth, employment and the development of the country. [applause] it is going to be participative loans. this will allow us to give quasi-equity. we are also going to regionalize the isf.
it works well. it is not as an enough in the regions. everyone has to go to paris to ask for funds. the isf has not been created to be an equity fund like any other. the tax on financial transactions, which will be implemented, for which we had long discussions people a telling me, let's wait for the rest of europe before we do that before we implement that tax. i do not understand. they impose the 35-hour week. [applause] the mayor is smiling.
that shows me he is honest. i knew he was. [applause] when the 35-hour week was decided, you could be for or against. nobody waited for the other countries to be the same. i want you to understand this it is financed the regulations that brought us to that crisis. it was not an economic crisis it was a financial crisis that created a trust crisis which created an economy crisis. financed the regulations do you not think it is noble economically and politically fair, morally indispensable that people who bought as in the situation we are in participate
in the solution in the reduction of the deficit? who could be against that? when you want to feed your country come you pay a tax. when you buy apartments, a house, that is a transaction you pay tax. a financial transaction would be the only transaction that would escape any tax, any contribution to the financing of our social model. of course, the question is not to know whether we should do it alone. of course we need to do it with the others. we need to bring more funds. this is going to prevent offshore and -- offshoring. what hypocrisy.
those with telling me do not do it before the others, they know that the others will never do it. therefore, we will not do it even. that is the truth. let's face it. france will show the example. we are going to implement the tax. we are going to leave behind us the rest of europe. if i came here and i told you, we are going to impose a tax the day the british half decided to join us, i know -- the british have decided to join us. we will have a tax the day the americans do. that would mean we would never do it. ladies and gentlemen you understood i had a speech here.
i did not read it. [applause] i decided to speak freely and frankly to you. [applause] i will conclude with this, i will tell you one thing, it in the end, for you, the situation is complex. for politicians, whether they are, the situation -- whoever they are, the situation is difficult. why is it difficult? congress people, mayors, governors, president ministers all, we are facing a situation that none of our predecessors ever knew. we have to manage suffering the crisis, we have to reassure, and
at the same time we have to invent everything from scratch. i would like to convince you of that. the ideologies of the 20th- century no longer work. we have to be pragmatic. we have to be open to me we have to understand what is going on. we have to -- we have to be open. we have to understand what is going on. this is the change in our political lives this is what has changed the most in the last 10 years. it is the speed with which we have to decide. markets are deciding in a thousandth of a second. the democratic process as for consultation, of voting, -- asks for consultation, voting, the two houses, the courts. we have to take decisions
faster. the decisions that are much more important. we cannot consult a big book where everything is written. what we are going through, very people went through before us. this is my conclusion. i think elected officials should be held up to the higher standard. this world, we can no longer live. we have to tell the truth. in this world, we cannot let the rich. whatever happens, -- cannot lack courage. whatever happens, the situation is so difficult, we cannot wait. and i think we should all work together. nobody holds the truth. it is so complex we have to
look for a majority beyond our partisanship. it is respectable and important. ladies and gentlemen i thank all of you for having, in such large numbers. let me tell you that i am convinced that france can resist the crisis. france has all the assets it needs. more than ever in 2012, work, effort, innovation, will be our strategy. let me wish you a happy new year personally, to all of you personally and professionally. two people in the majority, a
professional as well as personal. and for the minority, i will tell you personal wishes. [laughter] [applause] from the bottom of my heart. for the rest, i will not say anything else. i will tell them i am glad that i came. happy new year, everybody. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [applause] >> gabrielle giffords has announced she will resign from congress this week to concentrate on recovering from wounds she suffered in an assassination attempt a little more than a year ago.
the congresswoman made the announcement on her website. here are her remarks. ♪ ♪ >> arizona is my home always will be. a lot has happened over this past year. we cannot change that. i know, on the issues we fought for, we can change things for the better. jobs border security, veterans we can do so much more by working together. i do not remember much from that
horrible day. but, i will never forget the trust you placed in me. to be your voice. thank you for your prayers and for giving me time to recover. i have more work to do on my recovery. what is best for arizona? i will step down this week. i am getting better. every day, my spirit is alive. i will return and we will work together for arizona and this great country. thank you very much. ♪ ♪
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> giffords is 41 years old. she served as the representative for arizona's eighth congressional district. on january 8 she was worried -- wounded in a shooting that left six people dead. a special election will be held to fill her seat. next q&a with diana west. then, david cameron discusses the state of his country's economy, first at the house of commons, then during a conservative party debate. at that, and the chant is the nicolas sarkozy talking about economic conditions in france -- another chance to see nicolas sarkozy talking about economic conditions in france.
>> mr. speaker the president of the united states. >> tuesday night president obama delivered his state of the union address. live coverage begins 8:00 p.m. eastern. live on c-span and c-span brady of. on c-span 2, what's the president's speech -- watch the president's speech. throughout the night, go online for live at video and to add your comments. all at c-span.org. >> this