tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN May 13, 2014 6:00pm-8:01pm EDT
implications of climate change. so i'm grateful to senator nelson for bringing his passion and his expertise on this issue to the floor today. mr. nelson: and, mr. president, i want to thank my dear personal friend, the senator from rhode island, for his kind comments but especially thank him for his passion and his leadership on this issue. there are parts of america that it is time to wake up, and especially one part of that is the state of florida. we have, because of the nature of our state being a peninsula that sticks down into water surrounding it on most sides -- therefore, you would not be
surprised that we have the longest coastline of any state save for alaska. and when it comes to beaches, the state of florida by far has more beaches than any other state. but because we have so much exposure to the oceans -- the atlantic on the east, the gulf of mexico on the west -- we are particularly subject to climate change that the earth is heating up. now, why is the earth heating up? well, there is the effect known as the greenhouse effect, and what this is, if you put certain gases into the atmosphere that are as a result of man-made efforts -- so, when we burn
things like oil and coal and we don't scrub out a lot of the stuff, it goes into the atmosphere -- well, one of the things that goes into the atmosphere is carbon dioxide. and what carbon dioxide does is it goes up into the upper atmosphere, and it forms this greenhouse effect by creating an invisible shield that what happens when the sun rays come and strike the earth at daylight, those rays then reflect off the earth's surface, and under normal times, they bounce back out and radiate back into space. but not if you have a lot of gases up at the very beginning of space, at the top of the
atmosphere, like carbon dioxide. and when the earth's surface radiates the sun's heat, it goes back up as if it wants to go out into space and it's trapped. and what happens is the entire atmosphere of the earth then contains that heat and slowly over time it builds up the temperature. now, when you look at a globe, what do you see mostly? you don't see land; you see water. and so what happens is that most of that heating up of the earth's atmosphere is absorbed into the temperature of the ocean. because of the rise of the ocean
temperature and the temperature of the air, what starts to happen? what's happening up toward the northern climbs as well as the southern climbs. have you heard the report in the last couple of days about big chunks of antarctica are now falling off of antarctica? have you heard about how all of the ghaish sheers on top of -- the ghai sheers on top of green shall the glaciers on top of greenland are now falling off the sea thus causing the sea rise? now, i want to flip it back to the senator from rhode island with this comment: in the hearing that we had of the commerce subcommittee in miami beach -- i chose miami beach. why? because it's ground zero.
at high tide, they're already having flooding in the streets of miami beach. at a seasonally high tide that they expect coming up in october of this year, they expect constant flooding. and, as a result, we had the mayor of miami beach tell us about the efforts of them trying to redo the infrastructure to get rid of the water when high tides come in. what we also had testify was a scientist at nasa, a fellow who is a four-time space flyer. he left the astronaut office. he's back at the goddard space flight center in maryland. he is a scientist, and what he testified to us was not foreca
forecast, not projections projee testified to us measurements of sesea level rise over the last 0 years. and for florida, the sea level rise, as measured by nasa -- these are indisputable measurements -- is five to eight inches. his projections were, in another 20 to 30 years, a foot rise -- 12 inches more. and by the end of the decade, two to three feet rise. i hasten to add, 75% of florida's 20 million population lives on the coast. can you imagine what a two- to
three-foot rise on florida would be? it would inundate unbelievable amounts of the urban community of our state of florida. so the question is: are we going to do something about it? i want to flip it back to the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: on my trip through senator nelson's state, the army corps of engineers officials in jacksonville gave me some pretty dire warnings about what the sea level rise portends in florida, both the punch from storms that will bring higher seas ashore and the steady encroachment of salt water. this, as the senator recognizes, is a scene from western boynton beach after tropical storm isaac in 2012. i don't know if you can see it, if you're watching, but this
sign says "no wake zone." the family put up a "no wake zone" sign for cars going by not to put wakes up to create more damage. the corps also showed me what two feet of sea level rise would do to everglades national park. i think went down to everglades later on. but -- i went down to everdplaids lateevergladeslater. two feet -- that's all ocean again. that's a pretty serious change. the southeast florida regional climate compact predicts that waters around southeast florida could surge to two feet in less than 50 years. so that's a preview of coming attractions, everglades under water. what was interesting is that the
local officials, both republicans and democrats, were working together on this. the division that exists in this body doesn't exist down in. mayor sylvia murphy is a republican. former mayor christian jacobs is a democrat. they both know that flooding and access to drinking water are not partisan issues in the way that they divide us here. here are a couple more examples from my visit. this is castillo de san marcos, the famous ancient fort. very beautiful. it sits along the water there. if you add three feet of sea level rise, it turns from being part of the coast to being part of its own tiny little peninsula surrounded by flooding. it is the oldest masonry fort in the united states. and this is what fort matanzas
would look like. this is a little fort built by spanish colonists in 1742, built right here on this inland. if you add three feet of sea level rise, suddenly it's in the water. it has nothing to stand on. as it is, they have built a wall to protect it from the sea level rise that's already happened. and from time to time the high tides lap over that wall. you said that there is an enormous amount of harm here that could happen to people. one of the scientists that i met in florida said i it this way: "if we don't do something about this, people are going to get hurt and it's going to cost a lot of money." and that's true. one topic i'd like to discuss is the question of how the sea
water will affect the freshwater supply of florida. senator necessaril nelson is and i'll yield back to him to discuss the limestone bedrock problem. mr. nelson: mr. president, you would naturally ask the question, well, could we solve this problem in the united states like the dutch have solved a lot of the coastal areas of the netherlands by building up dikes? a lot of their land is actually below the level of sea level. you can't do that in a place like florida because the substrait under neath the surface soil is a porous limestone, much like swiss
cheese, so that if you try put up a dike, it's not going to hold any water back because the pressure of the water as it rises is merely going to go un underneath the dike into the limestone, which is the source under the surface of florida of a lot of florida's drinking water, because that water in that honeycomb limestone is fresh. and what happens on sea level rise? more water, higher water, more pressure. the pressure then starts to push underneath the surface as well as over the surface of the land, and that causes the intrusion of salt water into the freshwater
drinking supply. another consequence of this is, because florida is so low -- believe it or not, mr. president, our highest point is at a point right here the alabama-florida line; it's actually 356 feet high. but when you get into portions of south florida, it's very low. so, obviously, sea level rise is going to cover a lot of land. but another consequence is that a lot of flood control is now regulated by gravity. you go from a higher position of flood and you flow by gravity through canals to a lower position of the sea level. when the sea level rises, now
that water during floods -- hurricane, rainstorm, whatever -- can't flow. the only way to correct that is to install very expensive pumping equipment. and finally in this segment of an exchange with the senator from rhode island, i would say that what's another consequence of the temperature of the oceans rising -- remember the greenhouse effect? most of that heat is absorbed in the oceans. what is the fuel for a cyclone in the northern hemisphere called hurricane that goes counterclockwise? what is the fuel for it? it is the temperature of the water.
hurricanes in the northern hemisphere go counterclockwise. hurricanes in the southern hemisphere go clockwise. what happens to the intensity of the hurricane? it goes up as the waters get hotter. that's why usually, as the hurricanes are forming into these massive storms over the south atlantic and the caribbean, they start going north, they start to di dissipae because the waters are cooler. it doesn't provide the fuel for the ferocity of the hurricane. likewise, higher water temperatures, more frequency of hurricanes. now, in our state we live in a peninsula that sticks down into the middle of hurricane highway. it's a way of life.
we understand that and we've handled it pretty well, especially after the disaster of 1992, the monster hurricane, hurricane andrew. our building codes are up and so forth. but you can't withstand a lot of hurricane andrews, which part that have was considered to be a category 5, something in excess of 160-mile-an-hour winds. you know what 160-mile-an-hour tornadoes do to a small, confined, tightknit cyclone-type activity. imagine what those wind speeds do in a massive hurricane covering hundreds of miles. and now you start to see, then, the effects. an insurance industry cannot withstand insuring structures that are going to sustain that kind of damage. what's going to happen to the cost of insurance?
it's going to go through the roof. what's going to happen to the cost of flood insurance? that we have been been through so agonized here in the federal flood insurance program? what's going to happen to the actual structures and the people who not only are subject to being flooded because of the rise of sea level but of having their whole dwellings and city torn up like her can andrew did to downtown homestead, a relatively small population of florida and absolutely tore it up. that's what we're facing unless we do s somhihing about climate change. and the first thing we've got to do is we've got to stop this denial that it's not real.
the scientists are telling us it's real. the nasa astronaut scientists says it's measurements. they're flooding in miami beach. the local governments have banded together in southeastern florida to try to get ahead of it. why can't we get some of the senators here who because it's not politically correct in their politics to recognize what the truth is? so that question start planning for this not as a protection but to plan for the protection of planet earth and see if we can stop some of the causes of the climate change. and then once we do it and the
nation that stands as the role model to the rest of the countries, we're going to have to get them to do it too. otherwise you're going to see what has just happened in the last couple of days -- large chunks of antarctica are beyond saving. and the consequences are grave. i really appreciate the leadership of my friend from rhode island and senator boxer of california. you-all have been the ones that has been at the point of the sphere. thank you very much. mr. whitehouse: it's a pleasure to be with you, senator, and your leadership is really remarkable. here's another example from my tour. this is broward county. if people say it's not real, ask the owner of this house. "for sale" sign. good luck selling that house with the ocean up through it.
that was 2010. now broward county photograph, your commissioner, kristin jacobs, who was the mayor during this time, gave me these pictures. again, this is not -- this is tide. look at the sky. it's a beautiful day. this isn't rain. this is tide flooding in. and what it does to the cars. it's a mess. and as senator nelson described, because florida is this limestone kind of hard sponge, what keeps the salt water out is the pressure of the fresh water holding it at bay. there's no wall, there's no structure that keeps the water, salt and fresh, balanced. it's a hydraulic system. and what they've done is they've built these canals, a very complex system of canals, where they've raised the water so that
they have pressure so they can push it back. well, as the sea level comes up, they're losing that fight. and so here's a line through broward county of how far the salt water has already intruded into the water supply. if you drill wells on this side of the red line, your water is no good. and all these wells, the little green spots all over here, all these water areas, they're in the way because this line is moving. and as the army corps engineer in jacksonville said, florida is in a box because as the sea level rises, the way you keep the fresh water available to people is by raising the fresh water and that keeps what the engineers call the hydraulic head that pushes the sea water back and allows you to maintain fresh water for drinking and other purposes, for agriculture,
for florida oranges and grapefruits and all the things we count on. well, if what you're worried about is flooding, you can only raise the fresh water head so far because you raise it enough and what have you got? you've got fresh water flooding. and there's no way out of that conundrum. there is no way out of that conundrum for florida. and he said, whether it happens in a hundred years or whether it happens after the next bad hurricane, that's what's going to happen. and that's a terrible predicament. and it's not going to get better by pretending it's not real. it's not going to get better by denying it. and if you go offshore, you get to the problem of acidification, which happens from the carbon. this is not a theory. people say climate change is a theory. no. the acidification of the ocean from heightened carbon dioxide is something you can do in a lab. it is a scientific fact. it is a law of chemistry.
so it happens. and what happens is that it's really starting to hit the reefs and the fisheries as the ocean warms and turns more acid. mayor murphy is the mayor of monroe county. i met her in key largo, which is one of the famous world destinations. and i said, what is acidification and warming, what's that doing to your reefs? and she said, well, the reefs are still beautiful unless you'd been out to see them 10, 15 years ago. the reefs are still beautiful unless you'd been out to see them 10, 15 years ago. people see the change. i met with the snook and game fish foundation in florida and marine industry folks and they're concerned about what's happening there. and, in fact, the problem goes all the way up the coast.
when i came down through north carolina and south carolina, the fishermen there told me they're starting to catch snook off the carolinas. i mean, it's one thing when we're catching grouper and tarpon up in rhode island, but what they're seeing in the south atlantic scope the same thing that a rhode island fisherman said to me about the ocean off our coast. he said, sheldon, it's getting weird out there. we're catching fish our fathers never saw in their nets i theirr lives. so when a snook comes up on the line off the carolinas, that's a sign that something is really dramatically changing. and these reefs are changing as w. last story. rhode islander, mike shirley, works at the guana talimatto matanssa? how did i do.
the national estuary research and reserve. that's just outside of st. augustine. he moved up there from south floridflorida florida. he moved up seven years ago. when he got up there, he said, you know what's noticeable? there are no mangroves. south florida is covered in mangrove but there weren't any here. now, seven years later, the place is covered in mangrove. all that habitat migrating northward as the oceans and the water warms. and it's changing things. and he said one other thing. he said, you know what we've got to look out for? there's going to be another migration north. it's going to be the people leaving flooded south florida. who can't get fresh water, whose homes are flooded, who can't deal with their car going hubcap deep in salt water every high tide. they're going to be moving up. it's not just the people from the cold north coming down to
florida. now the people from the flooding south he worries are going to be coming north again. and i'll say one last thing. the mayors were terrific. sylvia murphy, the mayor in monroe county, is putting climate and energy policy at the very forefront of her 20-year growth plan for monroe county. mayor phillip levine of miami beach is hard at work. he says, "sea level rises are reality in miami beach. we are past the point of debating the existence of climate change. we're now focusing on adapting to current and future threats." mayor levine is pushing a $400 million plan to try make the city's drainage system more resilient in the face of rising tides. from mayor joe riley in charleston to mayor he ha mayorn
in is a advantage a, to the mayors in south florida i mentioned, south miami, surfside, miami shores, cutler bay, palmetto bay, the seminole tribe. the local officials are all serious about tackling climate change. it's real. they see it in their neighborhoods. they see it in their districts. they see it in their towns. and they're away from this poisonous place where the polluters control what people are allowed to think and see and do something about. we have got to start listening to the american people. we have got to start listening to the mayors who inhabit real life and not the political fantasy in this senate. we have got to start dealing with this. lee thomas. lee thomas, worked for president ronald reagan. he was a member of the reagan cabinet. he ran the environmental protection agency for ronald reagan. last week, he wrote an op-ed that i know the senator saw in the ""tampa ba "tampa bay timesg
florida's leaders that wake up to the changes taking place plais in thplace inthe sun shan. here's what he said -- "whether a democrat or republican, florida residents cannot afford to ignore the evidence of climate change." that's a reagan official saying that. come on, republican mayors, reagan officials? at some point we have to wake up. this is real. just last year, thomas joined all the other former republican e.p.a. heads, four of them, and they wrote this. "the costs of inaction are undeniable. the lines of scientific evidence grow only stronger and more numerous. and the window of time remaining to act is growing smaller. delay could mean that warming becomes locked in.
a market-based approach," they say, "like a carbon tax would be the best path to reducing greenhouse gas emissions." and bob samuelson just said the same thing in his editorial over the weekend. and i'll say that the citizens of florida and the people of united stateof theunited statese to have a senator like bill nelson who's aware of this problem, who's fighting hard to solve it, who's listening to his mayors, republican and democrat alike, who are telling him what is happening in their home state and who is willing to bring the commerce committee of the united states senate down to miami beach town hall to make sure that everybody understands what is going on. he helped bring that message back to washington and it was a terrific thing. so we will continue working together to get this body to wake up out of its polluter-induced slumber and face the realities that people
all across this country are seeing in their daily lives. it is, indeed, mr. president, time to wake up. and i yield the floor to any final comments that the senator may wish to make. mr. nelson: the senator from rhode island has stated in one of the more eloquent fashions details about my state of florida, because he was so passionate about the subject and so unselfish that he wanted to start in other states -- north carolina, south carolina, georgia, and several places on the east coast of florida. it is extraordinary. mr. president, i would leave you with this thought: every time i hear a senator like senator whitehouse speak about this subject, and every time i
look at a picture of the planet like he has on the poster that says "time to wake up" my mind's eye goes back 28 years ago to the window of our spacecraft on the 24th flight of the space shuttle, 203 nautical miles above the earth, circumnavigating the earth at 17,500 miles an hour, complete a revolution of the earth in 90 minutes. when you look back at our planet , which is so beautiful, so colorful, so alive, so creative, and yet you look at the rim of the earth as it falls
off into the deep blackness of space, there's a thin little blue band, and upon closer examination out the window, you can actually see the thin film of what sustains all of our life, the atmosphere. and then with the naked eye you can see points on the earth where we are messing it up. you can see the color contrast of the destruction of the trees in the amazon upriver in the amazon. you can see the result of cutting down all the trees on an island nation like madagascar, which fortunately has started planting trees in that last quarter century, and therefore the result of that tree cutting in -- both in this hemisphere as tbhel the island nation
of -- as well in the island nation of haiti, when the rains come, there are no trees to hold the topsoil and it flows out the rivers and the mouths of the rivers and you can see it from space in the discoloration of the water that is for miles and miles out into the brilliant blues of the ocean. and if we don't do what people like senators boxer and whitehouse are saying and wake up to the reality of climate change and try to get ahead of it by changing policies that will stop the greenhouse effect or at least slow it down, then what we are going to have for future space fliers are going to look back at a planet and the coastline of those states that senator whitehouse visited, all
being in the southeastern united states, that coastline is not going to look the same. it's not going to be as distinct coastline with a white beach along it that outlines it from the blue waters of the atlantic. it's going to be much different. and to the great detriment of the people who live there and call that home. mr. president, i yield the floor.
mr. reid: mr. president, had mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: it is. mr. reid: i ask consent it be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule 22, tomorrow at 11:15 the senate proceed to vote on cloture on calendar number 664, logan, calendar number 665, tuchi, calendar number 266, human atwawa and on 650 williams, further if cloture isvoked on clech 664, 665, 665, the time until 5:15 be equally divided between the leaders or their designees and at 5:15 the senate proceed to vote on confirmation in the order listed. two minutes of debate equally divided in the usual form, and any roll call votes following the first in each series be 10
minutes in link, further if the motion to consider be considered and made and laid on the table with no intervening action or debate with no further motions, any statements not be printed in the record and the president be notified of the senate's action and the senate resume legislative session and proceed to vote on h.r. 3474. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the judiciary committee be discharged with further action on s. res. 441. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 441 designating the week of may 1 through may 7, 2014, as national physical education and sport week. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding with the
measure? without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed. mr. reid: execution the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to consider be considered laid on the table and no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to s. res. 443. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 443 recognizing the goals of national travel and tourism week and honoring the valuable contributions of travel and tourism to the united states. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. reid: i ask that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table and there be no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to s. res. 444. the presiding officer: the clerk
will report. the clerk: s. res. 444, relative to the death of harlan mathews former united states senator for the state of tennessee. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to consider be laid on the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, i now ask unanimous consent when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 9:30 on wednesday, may 14, following the prayer and pledge, the journal be approved, the morning business deemed expired, the time for the two leaders reserved for use later this the day, following any leader remarks, the senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to h.r. 3474, finally that all time during ajiewrmt and morning business and executive session county postcloture on the motion to proceed to h.r. 3474. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: under the previous order, there will be up to five roll call votes at 11:15 a.m.
tomorrow. and there will be another series of roll call votes, could be as many as four at 5:15. these are mostly related to nominations, in fact, they all are. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it it adjourn under s. res. 444 as a further mark of respect to the memory of the late senator harlan mathews of tennessee. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 9:30 tomorrow under the provisions of senate resolution provisions of senate resolution
journal." >> drop the dropout is the headline in the national review article that by charles c. w. cook. this country was built by people without formal credentials. join us from new york as charlie cook, writer for national review. what do you mean by drop the dropout? >> guest: well, i was reacting primarily to an article i saw was scott walker. i should say at the out that nobody should go to college. i went to college myself. what i do mean it's creeping commercialization when i caught economic snobbery is dangerous for a free country. this particular headline against scott walker called him pejoratively at dropout. he said something that the right that disagreed with. he made mr. urkel claimed for historical interpretation that the rate that disagreed with and in response, the right to point out they haven't been to college. i think that is extraordinarily dangerous for a number of
reasons. in fact, it wasn't the headline in the discussion to this piece. a number of people suggested scott walker, for example would be a strong presidential candidate. going through college for his son issues you can stick with something that has been in the military. frankly this working job on direct debit donald's not sure that was particularly different in terms of applications. i thought i would write and point out firstly this is not the road we want to go down. secondly, dropout is not a pejorative when you look at american history. >> host: what do you mean? >> guest: well, first start,
the president in american history first-come abraham lincoln didn't go to college at all. now we have as an ideal nice country and nice country and one is an immigrant i think it's a beautiful plan suddenly is not the case in my country, we had the idea that somebody can rise from nothing and become president, can rise from nothing and can become a ceo or an inventor for a hero or a star. now, so many of the people who have influenced the direction of the united states either didn't go to college at all or dropped out when they found elsewhere. look at the computer industry. bill gates trapped. steve jobs dropped out. michael dell dropped out in the act in profession the same thing is true. business millionaires, billionaires just peruse the list of american billionaires
and you'll find people who thought after a while, perhaps before they even pack their coming and no, this college thing is that for me. does that mean college can't be worthwhile? no, it doesn't. it doesn't mean we should be careful to complete academic qualifications in academic ability with virtue or with prosperity. the two things are not the same thing. >> host: how do people view it within the context of public sector or public service versus the private sector? >> guest: that's a great point as well because it seems to me in the united states you can dropout of college to revolutionize people's life. you can't dropout and then get a job as a public school teacher or in many cases just unreasonably basic bureaucratic jobs. and that is increasingly true in the private sector, to although not quite as much. firstly, i am really not
convinced that for the vast majority of jobs a college degree is necessary. in fact, when you look at the application criteria for most public sector jobs, i'm not talking about areas in which qualifications are necessary. i'm not talking about medicine or engineering. but for your average government job that requires a degree, all it does is require a degree. it doesn't require degree an admin or whatever it is that you'll do it. i'm not completely sure that it's a good idea and i also think it leads to an odd hierarchy. singapore, for example, has an educational system that allows those who are excellent into streams. a streams, be streams and relegates those who are not to the future outside of what singaporeans consider to be excellence. they stream people at a very early age. they say you are destined to be
a government administered or bureaucrat or you are not. people develop different stages in a commercialized society can often be a society in which people who may be developed late have opportunities to shut down. i'll give you an example from my father left school at 16 he didn't go to university. i'm the first male in my family to go to me. he was in the military and then he had a business career. he founded his own business. now i fill up the retirement age in britain he is applied to a variety of outlets and charities and said i have some business experience. could i maybe volunteer my time to help? you know, invariably the lesson has been whether qualifications? because they don't have a degree, but here's what i've done with my life. well, i'm sorry, mr. côte, that is not her hiring criteria.
is that sensible? i'm not sure. >> host: how has this -- how has it evolved that a college degree is required? how is that evolved over history? >> guest: well, as they say in the peace commit the united states in my view has been educational system now that doesn't really suit it. the idea of mandatory education is standardized testing, a central organizing government run curriculum is not how america worked for its first hundred years. you start by not how britain worked. at the beginning of the 20th century, in fact if you look at britain in 1900, the front page of the times there was a certain jealousy of the organized nature of oppression in society and the way in which they were cracking
out their college graduates and students who abeyta stateline. for some reason, in both britain and the united states in traditionally liberal societies, they adopted this prussian model that officially existed to turn out workers and turnout people who are obedient to the state and woodrow wilson in the early 20th century city needed people to be educated in a certain way so that they could form the sort of permanent technocratic bureaucracy that would run the country properly. traditionally in part in the united states that is not really how we saw education. we wanted people to rethink how to think, not what to think. the training that would make people be the primary point and yet somehow we imported this german model, which is heavy on research and have your credentials and heavy on being
taught rather than how to think. i'm not sure particularly suits say. so we have taken on him and applied it to her public sector. we've also played in many ways. for example, many states in america now, you have to have a license before you can become a hairdresser. why? it makes sense i think you have a license before you can become a doctor. it is important for patients to know that he went through the training. but when it comes to hairdressing, when it comes to beauty salon, even sometimes when it comes to issues of law, i don't know why we take in the view that it will be a piece of paper necessary for everything. >> host: we are talking with charlie cooke, writer for national review. we continue with whether or not colleges worth it. his recent piece for national review, drop the dropout. we have divided the lines. high school degree.
call (202)585-3880 if you have a college degree. 202-58-5381. postgraduate degree. let me go to jail who has a high school degree and helen belts, florida. go ahead, gail. >> caller: simply because we need to understand the material. i remember back in the 60s before they integrated the schools that they went to school when they graduate from high school they had a vocational trade. the health care body mechanics, things of that sort. something unless they have a college degree kind of like excelsior. i agree 100% because family cannot my generation.
the majority of us did not go to college. i have to be a licensed practical nurse and i was able to do well with my family. so this is not always about the college degree. i agree 100%. as an african-american, all the time our kids need to realize that they cannot afford to put you in college, but at the cheapest available. take your vocational training. eventually you can go back and you're not invented to pay my college funds. i agree 100% because remarkable people have done remarkable things with their college degrees and that is what i want to say. >> host: mr. cooke. >> guest: that's an excellent point and it speaks to what i'm saying that for many people college is a good thing and for many people it's necessary. if you're going to be a doctor
or an engineer company probably need to go to college. but what worries me is the way in which we started to fetishize education and we started to present that it's almost a right and that you don't go to college, if you don't go into higher education, then you've been done by a period in my experience mingling and i do think it is starting here as well, that these people to look down on the profession that leads people to look down on plumbers and carpenters and people who start their own businesses and people who work with their hands. the president came very close recently to acknowledging that for an awful lot of americans and our history degree is frankly useless and his own base in prussia from academic institutions for sin to apologize. he shouldn't really have apologized. it's obvious. where i live in connecticut, the
plumbers make between $150.300 an hour and they are fabulous at what they do. these people should be celebrated. there's always a risk when you start elevating companies start fetishizing college in academia by extension you are looking down on those who don't have it. and i don't think it is a bad message to send people. look, maybe college isn't for you. why not look into something else as well. >> host: u.s. news money section online says the median salary for a plumber was 4,902,012. the best people than about $84,000 a year. go ahead. >> guest: i was just going to say some thing that always amuses me in school was for some reason we started to treat academia as different than other areas. for example, i am not very good at any sport and nobody would
ever pretend to be wasting my time doing that because i would be wasting everybody's time involved. i don't know why we need to pretend that everybody is supposed to do in english literature degree or they may be much better if something else. >> host: all right, we would go to jail in brooklyn. high school graduate. hello, joe. >> host: hi, i graduated in 1980. i made more money than some of my friends from high school. [inaudible] she is and not a mechanic. he says i'm an engineer. -- [inaudible] >> host: joe, you are breaking
out. i think we got your point. will have to have to to move on to john walnut creek, california. college graduate. >> caller: i am disturbed by the ignorance of american history that mr. cooke is exhibiting. thomas jefferson is the person responsible for this system. he was the one the purpose of paragraph that there would be nine years of public education. this is fairly. but he wanted to have a system of public education three years everybody would take. after three years, one third of them would be kicked off. the people who are successful and the left would be left to go back to the farm and become good farmers. another three years another three would be wiped out from the educational system.
that third would be educated in higher education and they would be the people from which the legislators for this state were found. this is a tradition of america that we want the population to run the government. we see this in the present time -- in the present situation, there is an effort to get a national curriculum that is enforceable throughout -- everybody's going to agree, almost 47 states now have agreed to a national curriculum, which is a idea, that they have adopted -- they are going to adopt it as it is going to standardize everything. >> host: we will leave it there and have mr. cooke
respond. >> guest: i think it is probably important not to conflate how america has been and how the system actually shipped out from a thomas jefferson -- from what thomas jefferson wanted. thomas jefferson certainly had his views on education, but the fact remains until the early 20th century, education was neither compulsory nor universal with standardized testing was not the norm for either teachers or for students. he also wanted america to remain a perpetually agrarian society prayed that doesn't mean it did. -- society. that doesn't mean it did. the founding fathers, by and large, were educated and error --t men -- and error that
and erudite men. i think we have to be careful not to take the views of one of the founders and pretend that is how america has historically been one it hasn't. host: a viewer tweets -- marvin is watching us in pennsylvania with a postgraduate degree. you are on the air. i have an outstanding known -- outstanding loan of 9000 -- host: you'll have to turn that tv down. i'm going to move to kathy in california, who has a high school degree. caller: hav i was first working, about 20-plus yearse ago there was ae
job locally at an institution. there were looking for someone to do a particular position, anl they did not require college. fast forward 15 years verso, i noticed a person had the job wa. retiring. and now the job and expanded.i i the details -- what is the right word, the details of the job of not changed.but the it had got bigger, though. and the responsibility was theb. same. they required quite a bit of college to get that same position.the responsibility wase region it required -- the same. it required quite a bit of college. i read an article -- there was a lawsuit that said people could -- you had put down
to have a high school diploma to apply for a job. people switch and said if i cannot put that in my requirements when advertising for a job i will put down college. that kind separated the noncollege with the college. aa this wasi got an 25 years ago. in hindsight i wish i had kept going with my degree. it has gotten to that point where you really do have to have college. it really does not tell you who is going to be wise, smart, intelligent, good at managerial if they have a college degree or not. guest: i absolutely agree and we should not mistake education for wisdom and application for virtue. have beenpeople who through college who can barely
tie their shoes. i say this affectionately as somebody who went to oxford and had a great professors. there are an awful lot of people in the academy who i wouldn't trust to make me a sandwich. that melissa j fabulous on jane austen. but they useless outside of the academy. courseslarge number of to take it universities are extraordinarily silly. the fact they have a piece of paper at the end of it means pretty much nothing. you see this on awful lot. of my fiancé went through this. of -- in my fiancé went through this. and you see people advertising for a receptionist. -- when you see people advertising for a receptionist,
-- it effectively says you cannot have this job. if you can't have that job you probably cannot have the one that comes after that. that can be extremely dangerous. it's akin to the debate over the minimum wage, where conservatives will say people at keptery bottom are often out of jobs by a minimum wage that becomes prohibitive for their employer. it's not really a healthy development. on twitter -- marvin, we will go back to you in pennsylvania. caller: i am 74 years old. my first master is from nyu.
$9,500 on my loan. it looks like i will be paying this thing until i die. when does it end? two points about the student loan situation in this country. gentleman took out loans in exchange for a service, i'm not sure why he is still paying them off. i have very little sympathy for this, business owners take out loans and take risks all the don't expect them to be magically paid. if you want to go to college, get assistant. nobody put a gun to your head. i would also be interested to .now what the masters were in much of the way we talk about is we tell children
lifee tell young people will be better. there is a virtue in learning for its own sake. public libraries are a good thing. book,you want to read a maybe you want to learn how to build a boat. is going to mean it do you much good economically. i think we to conflate those two things, the not-so-subtle is you need to go to college because it will be good for you. it will also do good things for you. that is clearly becoming less and less true. the returns of formal education are diminishing. i broke my piece partly to point
that out. partly to knock the idea that it is good for everyone to go to university pre--- to university. i don't have a great's desk great amount of sympathy for people who take out loans to educate themselves like they want to. host: this is how our guest finishes the piece -- samuel, postgraduate degree from new mexico. i am a retired physician and i observe people over my
years of practice. the ones who were successful were the ones who learned to save their money. iece," book "financial the ones that start saving at age 18 have dramatically financial security throughout their life. it is a big issue pre-that big issue. -- big issue. in germany they can go to college for free. the situation for the gentleman just called, i agree with your response 100%. there's no reason to go into debt for college. if you have clear ideas of what you want to do, then that is great.
hvac, ents who were knewomeo who could like you said, all these people are -- and the doe with a lot of miners in my practice. if they are aggressive and save money and know the work ethic and don't use marijuana, they can be a success. that is my point. >> host: all right. what i your thoughts? >> guest: well, the first thing out with point out is education is not free. is just paid for by general taxation. the question is not whether we can write on a piece of paper that education will henceforth be free at the point of consumption, but it's whether as a society that's what we want to spend our money on. now, clearly that is not the decision that we have made to this point. a huge amount of government debt in this country.
there are annual budget deficits of a blow your mind. the priorities seemed still to be on the elderly, special security, medicare. after that on defense. so clearly we are not prioritizing education. should we prioritize education? very clearly given what i've said the answer would be no, at least not before those other things. i would say this. the one area in which i am sympathetic with the students and the size of the loans is that the majority of the universities in this country of charging ever higher fees and not actually giving anything more and return, and i'm not just talking about the diminishing value of having a piece of paper the says you have a degree on it. the number of administrators in universities increases every day . the number of non teaching
positions increases every day. the overhead increases. the quality of the education and educational staff does not. so there is role here for the universities themselves of their want people to make the decision to go there, there is role for them to restructure the way that they are run and make it more attractive. >> host: we will go to chris in middletown ryland. college graduates. >> caller: hello, mr. cook. i have a college degree, but i recently got to teach at a university as part of the rotc program. i found your comments about the fetishizing of the education to be accurate. there are a lot of people who are in college right now simply because their parents want them to be. we tell people they should go to college without necessarily instilling in them that college degree is a tool that can be
useful if you know what to do with it. i heard someone call it the educational industrial complex, which is the idea that everybody has to go to college. i found your commentary to be very relevant based on my experiences. >> host: mr. kirk. >> guest: well, i agree obviously. i think it goes back to my earlier point. inherently relegate something out. if it is good to get a college, best to go to college. if it is better to get a college and something else is going to suffer. you know, i understand why we got the idea into our heads that going to college was necessarily going to lead to a better life. when i was covering occupy wall street for a few months of this was what many of the disgruntled people down and had been told. they fell disappointed that they
had maybe gone through four years of college, racked up student debt, and had not got what they thought there were going to. some of that was to do with the financial crisis. must've been extremely fine -- frustrating to come out in 2010 and see and decimated job market. nevertheless, 110, 20 percent of the population went to college of course you can draw a line between college attendance and a better life, probably a better job, and probably easier access. when you are approaching half the country as burden is, and many on the left and on the right would like america to go down the road as well, when you're approaching that level, what to use to distinguish between somebody who is being and someone who hasn't. and, you know, this idea that there is some magic property inherent to a college degree that will lead a better life is
clearly. >> host: to your earlier point, mr. cook, and "usa today" opinion page, they're bored or is that it perdu can freeze tuition, so can other universities taking a look at what mitch daniels, former governor of that state is telling as president of purdue university, raising the tuition for in-state students to 10,000 out of state about 28. what to you make of these efforts? fair when of. >> guest: this seems to be an awful lot. ms. daniels is an impressive man he is not a magician. without at least going with his cap in hand to the states asking for subsidies he would not be able to make that commitment. clearly mitch daniels -- and you probably would not say it like this because he has to be
polite, but clearly he has recognized in his role that there is lot of waste and probably people working there don't need to be there. at the very least the administrative bureaucracy is less important than is the level of tuition. so i would admire them. >> host: jennifer from tallahassee, florida. high-school degree. go ahead. >> caller: high. good morning. i totally agree that you don't have to have a college education . we had a thriving business. and another thing that i noticed about going to college is that the debt that we incur a lot of times leads -- it affects you mentally because now you have to go out and you have to work
extra, you know, to pay off college. you know, so the train for. it's like, you are caught up in this revolving deal, you know, where you are too stressed. you don't get enough sleep at night. i mean, it does have long-term effects, the debt that we incur. trying to keep up with the stigma of we have created. >> host: all right. donna in massachusetts, a college degree. hi. >> caller: good morning. i do have an associate's degree and several college certificates , courses on the my belt. i am over 50. i am from the indigenous people of southeastern. [inaudible]
and out there in the world for anybody who wants to observe it and be one with it, and and my indigenous philosophy and what has been passed down, each individual comes into the community with a different passion for a different knowledge. and if we all collectively come together and allow each other to share their passion and what they observe in their lifetime, the sharing of knowledge gets passed down from generation to generation. i happen to have the a opportunity to spend time with an elder who was the keeper of the j1 treaty in canada. and what it was was a bell that was probably at least 6 feet
long that had wampum beads made out of court will show, purple and white. the purple went from the east to west, and in the center there were four images of man, of human, two legs. >> host: we will leave it there. let me go to twitter. can you comment on the yearly tuition increases which are consistently two to four times the annual rate of ablation jack >> guest: well, i think we probably cover done with the inflation of the administration and what is really becoming an academic bowl. if i could go back to the last caller, a beautiful point and that there is so much that we don't value. i mean, i never have had any of the experiences that were just described, and i probably won't.
in the modern times that means i have been denied access, but in reality in a big country such as this people are always going to take a vantage of their local surroundings. my father as a child spend some time in singapore. when he returned to england and went to school he was behind in mathematics, but he knew an awful lot more about the world, for example, than did his classmates. does that mean that he was behind the intellectual academic sense? did it mean he had learned something different? obviously was important from to learn to count and right properly. they're is a wealth of information out there. defining it to nearly is probably bad for us. what also say -- i mean, the last college guard walking out into the trees and discovering major. with the internet and the digitization of information now there's really no excuse not to be an autodidact and learn on iran if you want to. we effectively have the sum of human knowledge available free.
now, there's value in being surrounded by your peers and people are smarter than you and trained to teach. of course there's value in that, but there is no more information at the fingertips of even a poor person, relatively poor person, somebody even then a place like malawi. you know, and internet connection and a computer can do an awful lot of work that may be 34 years ago just was not available to people. and so the value of being sent to a building in which there are rules and particular rooms in which we teach this and that under kirk, but the piece of paper defining is allowed to teach you and on what date have diminished as well. >> host: mr. cook, harbor on twitter, on -- of college students are supposed : critical thinking skills and the importance of learning, not ours
for grades. >> guest: yes, well, they are supposed to learn that. i think if we let the unfortunate liberal tendencies of the academy in the last 20 to 50 years that we will see -- disinvited because he was going the makes of the students feel "uncomfortable he got very close to an actual learning experience and then decided against it. you know, the point in going to colleges to learn to think, and it's also to be confronted with ideas that are alien to you. i can remember being at the university myself and someone suggested to me that drugs should be legalized. my first instinct was that that was insane and there was something wrong with them. having looked into the issue,
that is not my position. and that taken the view that i did not want to be offended or made to feel uncomfortable, would never gone there. you know, really, not sure that a college environment and elantra is the best place to learn critical thinking and to have one's mind open to. >> host: of rockford, illinois erica by school degree. >> caller: good morning. thank you. i have a college diploma -- i mean, high-school diploma. earlier you were talking about licenses for hair dressers. well, would like to point out little irony to you. i think that the licenses are only to generate revenue for the state and the various governments. and i work on heavy trucks. i fix brakes, put the wheels and the bearings back in school buses your children live. i do not have a license to do so.
it's not required. however, it is required that a person putting in warming fluid in a dead body have a license to do so. it is about the money. on looking at having to buy a license to be a mechanic sometimes in because mike. thank you for the great work. >> said the two it's all over the place. there doesn't seem to be too much or reason. very often the pressure comes from the industry itself. if you can enforce a licensing system, you can keep other people out. >> host: jim, wilmington, north carolina. college degree speech ride high. i have 3 degrees. my follow went to cal tech. my daughter went to 70 in new york. i told my kids, get the cheapest college credits you can get. if you want to graduate from the name brands cool, just to the last year there.
it's all a racket, as far as i'm concerned. i never learned anything. twenty-five years in the consumer electronics market, and it's all about just having that piece of paper. >> host: and jim, what is your degree in? >> caller: digital engineering u.n. cc. >> host: and you don't in that helped you with your career? >> caller: oh, yeah out. it's the same job, only i don't have to put up with people that are complaining is bad. it's a definite advantage to have the college degrees. >> host: okay. it's an advantage? >> guest: welcome on not quite sure what the caller is asking. if it -- if it's an advantage i don't understand how it could be a racket. my view is that it is both a y suppose. i agree in a small part in that
it can be useful to have a degree. certainly engineering would be one of the. that, of course, does not mean there are none other ways of getting the same training. there was a study done in england that showed a considerable number of cases where people would have been just as well going to the -- be trained as an apprentice and going to do it at a university. it certainly, with less debt. you know, i think as a broad principle a lot of education is a racket, but this is not to suggest that no one should go to college, not suggesting whoever is watching, you should not go to college. maybe you should. pushing back against education and the idea and it is rare but. >> host: mr. kirk, what do you suggest the role of the federal government is, if any, in this debate?
>> guest: i did not want the federal government involved in the saddle. i don't want them setting educational standards in schools, some allies in education of any type. this is, as far as i'm concerned , an issue that should be resolved at the state level. the department of education, if i had my way, will be shut down tomorrow. >> host: this is a state issue ? >> guest: absolutely. education has traditionally been a state issue. i see no reason for that change. i imagine you may be driving at the question of common core, which is a big issue on the ride at the moment. my view of common core is limited and that i don't yet have children of my own, and i'm therefore not -- have not been subjected the first and experience of the sort that the comedian louie ck has in his recent rant. i am always vicious and come from a family of teachers.
my mother is a teacher. my sister is a teacher. i'm always suspicious of centralized, top down rules for educators and curriculum because very often they seem to carry the unpleasant smell of the lack of trust in those on the ground who almost certainly know and do their jobs better than someone sitting miles away. if i had my way this would be an issue that would be left to the states. beyond that large a determined of the local level. >> host: writer for national review, his recent peace, dropped the dropout, the country was built by people without formal credentials. thank you for your time. >> guest: thank you very much. >> on our next washington journal, the role, mission, and history of the council on foreign relations which was founded in 1921. we are joined by senior fellow at the council.
stephen served as u.s. ambassador at large for the former soviet union from 1997 till 2001. he will talk to them about ukraine and u.s.-russia relations. one year after publishing classified nsa documents journalist plan greenwald will discuss his new book on how he bet edwards noted. his book is no place tied for. washington journal is live each morning in seven eastern. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. british prime minister david cameron appeared earlier today to update members on the u.k. current foreign-policy in syria, russia, and ukraine. from london this is 45 minutes. >> quite a lot of evidence that publish results with the referendum may have worked, the turnout was substantially less
than the official one. the russians eventually -- what you think the russians motive is in the ukraine and crimea? do you think they have a long-term plan or is it impulsive the way that they are behaving? >> a very difficult question. i think that they have a basic desire to see countries that were once part of the former soviet union live on this fear of russian and loans. you know, if you talk to him as i do, he believes profoundly in mother russia. he believes the breakup of the soviet union is a tragedy for is country. he feels ukraine includes cities that are absolutely vital to russia. this is what you get when you talk to him.
he feels very strongly about. do they have a plan? and not sure it's a plan as income were going to do this in this country in that in that country. i think they have reacted quite upper to mystically to what has happened. i think in terms of crimea, your question, our argument has been, you can't unilaterally change the borders of the country. yet have the proper process. that should be something that ukraine itself has to have a process for. resolves lead to back it think it means that we need to be very clear, predictable, firm about our view that these countries her sovereign states and should have the ability to determine their own future. and the consequences, have their own future and if i apply
sanctions. on the tenth of march she said the eu was considering a far reaching set of consequences in a broad range of economic areas. to be honest, the sanctions today have been fairly limited. to be fair, the mere threat of sanctions is actually seeing the markets to a lot of the work force and economic consequences must be quite profound. where are we going on sanctions? of the russians do nothing further are we just going to leave things where we are? >> it is not easy across 28 countries in the eu, try to coordinate together. i would argue by and large that is what is happening. there would be consequences if the crimean referendum were to end. consequences if there was a further destabilization of the ukraine. there have been further
consequences. we said that there would be economic sanctions across a range of areas. if, for instance car russian troops were to the invade southern or eastern ukraine, we have strengthened that now by saying as recently as just today, the way the russians behave toward these elections will have an inborn determination as to whether they have sanctions. we have taken a range of steps. yesterday further steps were agreed in terms of naming individuals and businesses alike. we stand ready to do more if ukraine territorial integrity is not respected. we have tried to be clear, predictable, and tough. i think this has had an effect. i agree with the that the economic impact on russia to meet ec the downgrade of their economy. for a big flood of money, international markets, the bonds
have been relegated to very low status. seven impact on people. we have tech keep up this pressure, very clear and negotiated path to how these problems can be dealt with. part of -- the first question, what is russia trying to do, i think there is a misunderstanding on behalf of the switches that, you know, the game we should have is not to try and grab ukraine like a piece on the chessboard and rank it -- yankee toward europe. ukraine should be a bridge toward russia, have a proper relationship with russia. it's not as zero sum game. i'm not sure that the russians of, perhaps, understood that that is the rotation. >> to say they're supposed to do
more. are we being held back by our european partners? >> well, that's a discussion -- if they sense that we can agree across the 28 common-sense steps and so far we have been able to. whether it was cancelling summits, a change in the dca to the g7, nominating individuals, we agree that across the 28. all the different views around the table. of course burden intended to be fairly forceful and wanting to see clear and predictable paths to action. in particular to try and deliver that. i think we have delivered a very clear set of actions. you do get different views, but the last month so dealing with this, we've got to recognize
that if this continues we have to prepare for a very different, long-term relationship with russia. i tried to build a good relationship. i would like to see that happen. that will not be possible. way to make that clear when need to recognize that on behalf of this europe needs to think about its energy dependence on russia. we and the united kingdom are not dependent in any regard on russian energy, but some european countries are. some, you know, 90 percent of the gas. rates to make some long-term changes to our energy system within the eu and within the g7 to demonstrate that this sort of behavior will be -- can be allowed to continue. >> reports that they can aid the
ukraine. can you confirm that? >> from memory at think it has been contributing to some of the capacity building that is needed . obviously the main part of the program, some eu assistance. i think that it has got some technical advisers and financial management that is helpful. because ukraine is under enormous pressure, economic and financial pressure in needs and how. a number of conversations. do you think he has a firm stand in of what nato will do if he were to behave toward other countries. >> i would say i think he probably does. the states are obviously a
russian minorities in their country. they have experience sometimes from some pretty aggressive russian trade and other measures that have been taken against them. their advice to us on the european council has universally been, be tough, be predictable, be clear in your dealings of russia. but nato is very clear. a collective security guarantee. all members of nato have that guarantee. they know that they have that cloak of security around them. i think russian knows that, too. >> described by the secretary general, the game changes. you except for a very significant implications for how combat ready nato has to be. will it mean that we need to send more u.k. forces or u.k. assets to baltic states, some of
which want to see it in their countries. it is the changer. it has reminded people, i think, how important this defensive alliances as president obama put it at the g-7, is quite important that the russians seem that there are french soldiers partnering with estonian soldiers. there are british soldiers going on exercise. we should be doing the same things. these are important. we have the nato summit coming to wales in september is very important that data sends a clear and unambiguous message that it believes a collective
security, defense alliance. reassures its eastern members, but at the same time it does not give up on the other things, the drawdown in afghanistan also the future of nato where we actually could be doing more el countries that need assistance. the national security strategy or strategic defense requests neither seems to envisage a situation that we now see on russia's border with ukraine. to the needed adjustment? >> well, two things to say to that. one is you can never endorse arises cantor security planning corporate it for the next problem will come from. the ukraine, georgia, other countries of and discussing partnership agreements for many years without the sorts of
problems occurring. does what has happened fundamentally change the strategic defense review and what we're doing? i would not say that does. our programs go back. making sure our armed forces are well equipped. are not talking about deploying armed forces to ukraine or anything like that. it's about making sure that we can fulfil our nato obligations by making sure we have the most modern equipment. the thing that is very much will we do. just to confirm what it is we're doing with our nato allies, we have already, as you know, deployed for typhoon aircraft to bolster the mission over estonia, latvia, lithuania, offering an additional seven to that appointment, extending if required, sentinel aircraft deployment until the end of the year.
uk personnel will participate in enhanced nato exercises in the baltic states. we're developing a range of packages stabbed to planning and support and other advice to nail allies. it's very important to give reassurance to our eastern members at this time and a step up to the plate and make sure britain plays its part, and we will. >> the political chapters that the eu faces with ukraine have already been provisioned. the conclusion, agreed that those articles which must be extremely sensitive to russia regarding questions about, and security are to be signed by all 28 member states, satisfactory elections in the ukraine.
in this context does the government continued to take the view that in that eu association agreement all those security elements in it that the words ukraine actually includes the word crimean and will continue as far as the government is concerned to do it indefinitely, of the consequences. >> the short answer to that is yes. as far as we are concerned. we should respect the territorial integrity of the ukraine. that includes crimean. we can't change the nature of ukraine unilaterally or on our own. this for the people and the government of ukraine to, if they want to, go through the process. as far as we are concerned crimea is part of ukraine. one of the things the you has
done is put in place sanctions for businesses operating in the crimean in terms of their exports to the rest of the eu because they should be treated, as it were, as businesses operating from an occupied territory. hopes ukraine is included as far as the west of the government is concerned. >> i think he understands, which is that our view is that ukraine's territorial should be respected. crummy and should not be taken from ukraine. bogus referendum. the only way a country should have its borders changes to a proper democratic process. we're having a referendum was gotland bridge, and can choose
to a state with the united kingdom. no such process with the crimea. as far as we're concerned should be treated as such. i mean, there is then huge disagreement between us and russia. they view the ukrainian authorities as illegitimate. they say it was a coup. left his country after appalling acts in which over 70 were shot. we should properly respected the legitimate authorities run in the ukraine. it only highlights the importance of the elections. once the elections take place is much harder for russia say some other is not legitimate authority. helping make sure these elections go ahead, which is why we have so many, election
observers in the country. >> , of syria, and in the intervening time the military advantage seems to have swung toward the regime. what does this mean for u.k. policy? is it still our position that they should go before we can make progress? >> our view is very clear. the sad part of a series feature , the bloodshed, making it impossible. the united democratic free series which she plays a part. our view remains that the right thing for the british government to do is with our allies and friends, support the legitimate syrian opposition. we are not harming them, but we are gearing them non-lethal support. we should continue to work with
them, keep delivering our humanitarian aid and effort. do everything that we can to persuade both the opposition and syrian government into a process, which is what geneva one and two were all about. tragically they have not been successful. we should not change our approach. it is just frustrating that is bloodshed has been going on for so long. they have had tactical successes, but it's hard to, you know, really go further than that when you see the extent of the bloodshed in the country in the extent to of most of the. think it's hard to say more than that. >> you reiterated that you don't intend to on the rebels' demand that repeats. but in the intervening time there is strong evidence that the regime has come to the agreement and retain them
declare stocks of chemical weapons. and ron is continuing to arm has will and the regime. as you just said, the geneva talks have collapsed. isn't it time to reassess whether with small amounts of nonlethal aid is an appropriate response? >> i think there are lots of debates in parliament on this issue, and its right to listen to those. i think our current approach is the right one. thing supporting the opposition, helping them, giving them that nonlethal equipment, supporting diplomatic efforts on the chemical weapons from we should be working closely with the office of chemical weapons where they have gotten rid of 90% of their stocks. they're behind on their deadline, and we need to pursue them very vigorously. we also should be checking out the latest reports of chemical weapons usage. if they are the we need to think
of the steps that we can take. we should be on a with our partners. a foreign secretary as the key to 110 countries coming to london this thursday to discuss this. but it's painful because we are not making progress. i don't think we should change our approach. >> this seemed to be parting company with the united states on this. as you're well aware, it is reported that they have supplied anti-tank weapons to the rebels. isn't that a row we could go down? all the evidence suggests that according to vote wrong hands you can immobilize the weapons and -- >> if we were to negotiate partnership, we see our role as mentoring, assisting, providing nonlethal assistance to the
opposition, helping to shape and form the in various ways. i think that the u.k. parliament is been pretty clear that arming is a separate issue. we should respect that and play our part. >> if it's confirmed, but not you go back to parliament and say, look, this is getting very serious now. can we have another go? >> i think that chemical weapons as a separate issue. we have a separate track on that which is that they have got rid of the chemical weapons. the reports are extremely disturbing. we want those checked out, and then we should be working with our allies to determine what would be the appropriate action to take. >> you would not go back to the opposition and say, can we sit down? >> first of all, we have to get straight what has happened on the chemical weapons front. we have been very clear.
i was very clear that we need a clear evidence before taking any steps on the basis of evidence. >> they voted for intervention in one form or another but just could not agree on the terms. whereby has been used, and a national convention, a time to actually -- >> i think parliament, as you say, a slightly confusing "the think the mood was pretty clear. he did not want to take part in any military action with respect to chemical weapons use. so i think the right thing to do is to gather evidence. be clear about what has happened . if anything changes there to
come back to parliament and explain it. >> more precisely than last august, what potential action might be. >> one of my reflections, at the end of the day, the notion that there were going to give an second vote. that is why in the end i read parliament you in the way that i express. prepared to put down a motion that took into account his
humanitarian cause. 300 million pounds a year. the foreseeable future. >> one of the largest assume that. we have the capability to do that. i think that british public, this sort of humanitarian aid action, saving lives, providing food and shelter, preventing people from exposure of diseases we should keep it up. we should use our to leverage
our resources. i expect us to continue. >> can i pick up the point? the uk, the second largest bilateral, second only to the united states. and if you looked at the list of other donors in europe, proportionate to that capacity, but france and italy have not. 900 million from the u.k. to be given the scale of the crisis, and possibility elsewhere in the world, is that time that we said very explicitly that it is our
forward area. >> i think we should. i think there's an opportunity, and we have before and will again. coming up in brussels, the collaboration of the d-day landing. these figures do speak for themselves significant drop -- contributions. that's a big contrast to the g7 on aid and assistance. think actually making sure we stress the importance.
>> a recognition. eric spending and our commitments elsewhere. before you comment on that, specifically there has been some discussion. there and has been fantastic. the pressure is huge. i would just repeat, the ambassador,. >> we're continuing to expand the uk support. we're helping refugees in those countries and also doing well we can to help communities a little
longer term. our program is not strictly refugee camps in neighboring countries. there is some assistance, but i'm very happy. makes me very happy to take this point about her and make sure we're doing everything we can. probably two or three times in the last year and discussed this. specific things that we can help with, would be happy to do it. relating to both jordan and lebanon, derecognize that actually both countries, the majority of the refugees are living in the community and the cases being made which is contrary to what we would normally do.
until such time, is that something? >> i'm very happy look at that. the population, as the equivalent. 10 million people, to a million people coming to britain. you imagine the effect on the country in terms of the scale of people suddenly turning up in schools and hospitals and staying with neighbors. we should really put our weapons . i think you make a very good point. do more for these countries. >> treacly police to make sure we are spending it on the poorest people in the poorest countries quite rightly rules
make sure that we focus on that. we tried a major a budget is part of our national security council where we looked at how we can help development through building security. so making sure we help countries that have those sorts of needs that might not be low income countries but are under severe pressure is something we should do. it's a legitimate use for a but would help if your committee can look at this issue and make sure that the ngos and quite rightly want to pressure us in spending the majority of the money in sub-saharan africa in the poorest countries in the world understand that the needs of the love and vons and the jordans and, indeed, i would argue the libyans, the countries that could one day be really quite wealthy but help with its security and its capacity within government. you know, some of these things
are absolutely essential for development to take place. you don't have the rule of law. you don't have government capacity. you can't get anything done. so i think that some awful thoughts. >> helpful, prime minister. >> the fine observation. prime minister, 400 british citizens have gone. you can take away their passports, they're clearly not asking their moms and dads whether they can go. ready to engage with them, stop this radicalization. we felt that peer pressure, community pressure was the best way of doing it. what do you think the solution is to stop them from going further? ..
to recognize the importance of the government owns programs that help steer people away from radicalization. we do need to make sure that our security zones all over people thinking of traveling to syria and are stopping them taking away their passports and the nationality of necessary preventing them from going and perhaps going back if they have gone to making sure we do everything within oup