tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN December 29, 2015 11:47am-1:48pm EST
taking and reclaiming our democracy, we can only do that if we get big money out of politics. this is the key. it's not the be-all and end-all that it is the first preliminary step because if we want to do anything on any of the other issues we talked about, single-payer or that public education or the minimum wage or whatever you want to begin looking at, you can't do it if the game is rated, and it is. i've been there and i've seen it. i tried to fight against it and i started out in 1967 as the intern for robert f. kennedy and there wasn't all that much then. washington was a rather poor and seedy place but it's got progressively wealthier where
three of them are among the wealthiest counties in the united states. when i started in washington only 6% of the members in congress went on to become lobbyists because there wasn't that much money in being a lobbyist. now 50% of retiring members of congress become lobbyists. for the caregiving needs of the families that would allow us to be more affordable and also improve the quality of caregiving jobs. [applause]
we will make it possible for 40 million african-americans to even have a shot. i just have to say this, i present the pros population means one out of every four people on the planet are one out of four with the hand behind bars are locked up in the united states family of 5% of the world's population and those are disproportionately african-american and latino native american and almost all poor. it's no better to be rich and
innocent and poor and guilty in this country. that's where we are and so those numbers do not tell the full story. one out of every four african-american men have now is predicted to have a prison record by the time they are an adult. one out of three. that is a repeat of the dehumanization of the enslavement and jim crow and the idea that this could be happening in our country and we continue to act like it is okay or normal i think it's something that we've got to dial up opposition to. there are bipartisan ways to roll back but this has become the signature defining issue for the african-american community, period and you're talking about a population if you are a
democrat in order for any presidential candidate to win african-american to support that candidate, no, i'm sorry, easy% from the ansari, 90%, knowing sorry, 92 to 94%. you have a political democratic party that has to have a near unanimous support from the community and we have to climb over obstacle after obstacle after obstacle just to vote. african americans are standing in line waiting to vote and we elect a party that until recently wouldn't even break its breath to talk about the issue that was on the wrong side of this issue for way too long and so i want to say very clearly for a while the latino community has a thousand problems that have been immigration is number one. progressive women have a thousand for them. the african-american community
as a thousand problems but for us, mass incarceration, where you stand are locking up an entire generation of african-americans for stuff that we know kids are doing on college campuses right now is the number one issue, and anybody, i don't care who you are titled care what you did in 1963 were in 2009 or yesterday. if you grab a microphone and you say that you are a progressive and you don't speak about this issue with some passion and some heart and some concern and care as if it weren't for children under this level of threat, you cannot and should not count on the quiet support. it's the era of silence. it's over. [applause]
i feel personally horrible i started my career working on this stuff for years and decades and be failed over and over again to challenge the democrats to do better, to force the democrats to stop chasing after fear mongering racism and scoring political points off of our communities backs and that is why you're going to see more, not less but more african-american militancy on these questions. you're going to see more african-american scholarships on these questions and i think everybody in this room, if you hear somebody saying what are these people doing, they are ungrateful, they are uppity.
never again, we are not going to go quietly. this is getting worse, not better. we have been there. it's very important the community has been there. it would have been very easy to come out and say these immigrants are stealing our jobs. you have not heard that. the obama coalition includes the black leadership that defends immigrants. the community could have been very easily moved to be against the lg bt movement. our churches are not in the right place on this but you haven't seen any dominant african-american leadership attacking because of the leadership. these people are part of this coalition. latinos and african-americans for the environmental agenda more than the white community. the entire black congressional caucus voted for cap and trade. the greenest caucus in the house
was the black caucus. we have been there for every constituency down the line. and we insist that people be there for us this time. thank you president jones. [applause] very briefly, the priorities are skewed if we are going to really tackle inequality as many good ideas but i would say we must end these endless wars and america's engagement in the world. [applause] america's policing of the world is detracted from the real security needs, any property, redefining security at home and
funding the president could president could do in the first two hours is understanding that just transition transitioned at close to 800 bases in the world. [applause] they are not going to modernize nuclear weapons. i will begin to bring them down to a level and take them off the alert but just understand what he has done to damage the principles which could be deployed to end inequality in this country. [applause] before we close out i just want to take a moment to recognize katrina vanden heuvel. [applause] thanks to the panelists, robert reich, professor and former u.s. secretary of labor. [applause]
thanks to ai-jen poo director of the national workers alliance. [applause] thank you to van jones, former white house special advisor. [applause] and thank you to katrina vanden heuvel editor and publisher for the nation. [applause] we also thank everyone in attendance tonight. tonight's program has been co- presented by the nation magazine, the conscience of our country for 150 years and counting. i am judged ladoris hazzard cordell coming and now this meeting of the commonwealth club of california, the place where you are in the know is adjourned. ♪
we just heard about the c-span year-end review program. right now the bbc parliament westminster review takes a looke back at the major events in british parliament since september. ♪autumn tm in p hello and welcome to the review of the term of parliament.s a this season gave a new controversial leader of theway opposition who had his own way of tackling the prime ministers.
>> i ask a question from angela who is a mental health a mental: health professional. the government backtracked on on tax credit cuts werede. dropped dropped in at the, the chancellor was challenged by his reforms is fa. side. the ip leave i believe the place of the reforms is too hard. as the proposals stand, too many people will be adversely atfected. spin after 130 died at the hands of terrorists come a debate ondh whether to take military action sharply divided the house of commons that >> behold our values and contenn cont and belief in contempt and belief in tolerance and decency and content instead of having, u dossiers we now have moderate.w, >> but first as the sunny days of the summer drew to a close, there was a milestone to agree to those returning to westminster to get her majesty the queen became the longesty' reigning monarch ins history we. her majesty had reigned over us
for 63 years, seven months, and two days. on the day she was opening a new train line in the scottish borders. at westminster, mp's were congratulating her on the achievement. >> she has worked with 12 prime ministers, six archbishops, nine cabinet secretaries. she has answered 3.5 million pieces of correspondence. sent over 100,000 telegrams. and met more people than any other monarch in history. whether it is something she enjoys, like the highland games, or something she may be less keen on, such as spending new year's eve in the millennium dome, she never falters. [laughter] >> she is now on her 12th prime minister. we on these benches hoped she would be on her 13th. [laughter] we had hoped she would be on her
13th. [laughter] she reigned over 140 million people. that is a huge number. nearly as many as the number of the labour parties registered supporters. [laughter] >> that remark about the size of the labour party membership was a not too subtle reference to the opposite tortured long drawnout labour leadership election to enliven a potentially dull contest, labour mps have let into the race the backbench jeremy corbyn come a better with a long history of left wing rebellions in my passions in life are equality justice, human rights. and to the consternation and amazement of mps the jeremy corbyn quickly became the favorite to win. on september 14, the party membership elected him by a landslide. one of the most unexpected political victories of recent years it's been a idea latter to declare jeremy corbyn elected as leader of the labour party.
[cheers and applause] >> celebration time for the new labour leader was limited. a shadow cabinet had to be constructed and policies formulated. jeremy corbyn so often the rebel had to get used to being in the foreground. when he was photographed not singing the national anthem, his critics called his behavior is respectful. soon it was his first prime minister's question time. >> a jeremy corbyn. [cheers and applause] >> thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank all those that took part in an enormous democratic exercise in this country which conclude with me being elected to leader of the labour party and leader of the opposition. i thought my first prime minister questions about what do it in a different way. i'm sure the prime minister will welcome this as he welcomed this idea in 2005. two and half thousand people e-mailed me about the housing crisis in this country.
a woman called marie who says can what does the government intend to do about the chronic lack of affordable housing and the extortion rent charged by some private sector landlords in this country? >> we deliver 260,000 affordable housing units in the last parliament. we build more council houses in a country that in the 13th previous years has been managed. >> jeremy corbyn state with his questions from the public. >> paul, for example, says this very heartfelt question. why is the government taking tax credits away from families? i ask a question from calais or. what does the prime minister say to angela, to people like her who worked so hard in the mental health services, all people going to a mental health crisis who may be watching us today. >> all those working in mental health or indeed those suffering from mental health conditions is that we need to do more as a country to help tackle mental
health. >> that was jeremy corbyn first pmqs. i'm joined by the political editor of bbc "newsnight" allegra stratton. jeremy corbyn tremendous victory and labour leaders words used like remarkable and sensational. how big of a political shock to the system was set? >> his last rally before this was announced, someone came up to me and said i remember the beginning of the summer of the front page of the times anti-to rush and talk about it because it was a shock in july. months before the result that look like he was heading for victory. they said i remember your last. it's true because i did chortle when this poll came out. that was my mistake, an error of my political judgment. many people did it but there we are. what we didn't see was quite how the electorate of the labour electoral college that elects a leader point out it is changing in front of everyone's eyes. >> it is this gulf between the
parliamentary labour party and the paper market -- labour party mr. bush at the is it bridgeable? >> what is happening is that people who have come into the party had been recruited by people close to jeremy corbyn. so in some ways election reflected this movement that happened over the summer where people felt they were getting their labour party back if they paid three pounds they could vote. not all of these people go to this wednesday evening babies of constituents labour party in the reins -- in the rain. in that sense he is representative of the new shape of the party, nothing wrong with that new shape of the party, just that it is different. but equally at the same time there's a question mark about whether those people necessarily do or the activities associate with a full-blown members of the labour party, will they elect people to go to the party conference in september 2 of go against all the painstaking work at a conference in seoul.
they might do we get to see in the years ahead whether they hang around or whether they are proactive or not. >> a quick word about pmq the opposition leaders see prime minister's questions as a time, ever opportunity to stamp that personality for the entertainment of the nation. jeremy corbyn doesn't see it that way. >> he sees it as an opportunity to step his personality and is what he is doing their calling people at prime minister's question time since taking his questions but the real the e-mail in the address unlike a radio phone. i think it was maria, wasn't it? back to his persona because he feels his job is to be this kind of cipher for the people outside. that's not completely wrong. the problem with it is that it does feel a bit like he is not prosecuting a single argument so he is not sink to the prime minister this is the biggest policy issue this week and i
will use my six questions to get information. the strength of that is why not have people's voices come into the parliamentary chamber a bit more? and also using the prime minister struggle to do with it because he can't the openly rude to maria. i would be a bad luck ideas of where himself he has a tendency to be quite flash man, sort of a bit angry and terse. he must really keep that in check. it isn't a strategy by jeremy corbyn. this is just a man does business. >> do you think it appeals to some aspect of electric? >> i thought it was refreshing and then of people who don't follow politics who is did burst into their life through facebook and other ways as people now get their news and quite liked it. i think in the fall is the time the problem that will remain is companies t actually doing the first job of opposition which is holding government to account. >> thank you, like a. although the economy maintain
its recovery, the national deficit remained enormous. part of the cabins that tends to reduce it was to bring down a huge welfare bill. in july the chancellor announced reductions to working tax credits. been means by which those on low pay are able to supplement their income. tax credits have ballooned from an annual figure of 13 billion pounds in 2002, to 30 billion now. treasury minister changed to the tax credit system was essential. >> that's part of what my right honorable friend the chancellor called a new contract with working britain to access to businesses you are going to pay higher wages budget get lower business taxes and a stable economy spirit of these katz hid working families in every constituency, and were to be sneaked through the back door. indeed, win acid rain election campaign whether government would cut child tax credit, the prime minister said no, i don't want to do that.
>> can she explain how she thinks we can move in the direction and even out the economy is recovering, if we don't tackle the absurd level of tax payer subsidy to low pay -- [shouting] >> slowly some conservatives realize there could be a backlash. in october a new tory backbencher defied all convention by devoting her maiden speech in the comments to the strong attack on her own side. >> the prime minister has asked us that everything we do must pass the family test. cutting tax credits before wages rise does not achieve that. showing children to parents will be better off not working at all does not achieve that. as these proposals stand, too many people will be adversely affected. something must give. for those of us proud enough to call ourselves compassionate conservatives, it must not be
the backs of the working families we afford to serve. >> here, here. >> .com and still voted clearly in favor of the katz. word came through that is placed in the house of lords may strike out at the tax credit changes. but could they really vote out a financial measure? they were told by downing street they would be overstepping the mark it in the comments one backbencher was far from happy. >> does my right honorable friend share my concern that if the other place where to vote against working tax credits this would be a serious challenge to the privilege of this house, a privilege, a privilege codified as long ago 1678? and does he further share my concern that this would then entitle him to review the decisions of gray and asked
which in relation to creating more peers to ensure that government can get its financial business through? >> the robust language it didn't deter the lordships. >> these are people doing the right thing going out to work and trying to make ends meet. they are exactly the kind of people that the government has said that it wants to help. yet this change will have a seriously damaging impact on their ability to keep their heads above water. >> my lord, we can be supportive of government and give them what they did not ask for. and that's a privilege. or we can be supportive instead of the 3 million families facing letters at christmas telling them on average they will lose up to around 1300 pounds a year. >> i say to the government that these proposals are morally indefensible. >> here, here.
>> it's clear to me, and i believe that very many others, that these proposals blatantly threaten damage to the lives of millions of our fellow citizens. >> this government believes as the package that supports working people, these changes to tax credits are right. if we want people to earn more and to keep more of their own money, we simply cannot keep recycling their money so -- to a system that subsidize low-paid. >> haters voted to reject the government's tax cut. talk of a constitutional crisis, the prime minister bordered a review into the working of the lords to be carried out by this man, the former conservative leader of the lords. in the meantime the treasure to work out what to do with tax credits. the answer came in late november when the chancellor unveiled his autumn statement. >> i've listened to the concerns
i hear and understand them. and because i've been able to announce today an approved at the public finances, the simplest thing to do is not to face the -- phase these changes in but to avoid them altogether. tax credits are being phased out anyway, we introduce a universal credits. and what that means is that the tax credit rate and thresholds remain unchanged. >> there was more to the autumn statement than a scrap of the tax credit cuts. the chancellor announced new hope for people to buy their own homes and inducements to house builders to construct starter homes spirits of his spending review delivers a doubling of the housing budget, 400,000 homes with exit support from london, stage regenerated, rights to buy rolled out paid for by a tax for second home delivered by a conservative government committed to helping working people who want to buy their own home.
but we are the builder. we were elected as a one nation government. today, we deliver his spending review of a one nation government. the guardians of economic security, the protectors of national security -- [shouting] the builders of our better future. this government, the mainstream representative for the working people of britain. [shouting] >> replied on behalf of labour was this man, john mcdowell, the controversial appointment to jeremy corbyn as labour's shadow chancellor. mr. mcdonald opted for an unlikely thing in his speech. he was mindful of the trip george osborne had made during the summer to china. the chancellor met business leaders and workers in different parts of the country. as he spoke of the new golden era of cooperation between britain and china. >> is dealings with newfound comrades i brought him along
chairman mao's little red book. [shouting] let me quote, let me quote, mr. speaker. [shouting] >> border. i want to hear about the contents of the book last night spent -- [laughter] >> a quote from now. the quote is this. behaved. we must learn to do economic work from all who know how. no matter who they are. we must esteem them as teachers learning from them respect them. but we must not pretend to know what we do not know. i thought it would come in handy for him in his new relationship. [shouting] >> order. >> to the shadow chancellor literally stood at the dispatch box and write out from mao's
little red book. [laughter] >> look, it's a personal signed copy last night -- [laughter] the problem is half of the shadow cabinet has been sent off for reeducation. >> said george osborne having fun at the expense of john mcdonald. allegra come to think john mcdonald was well advised to use this stunt? >> no. i'm no left wing support of his but it's a disaster of the last one days to jeremy corbyn's leadership. i don' don't know if he gets ino clip your children to look on some of the deputy leader space where he says that he couldn't quite see what john mcdonald was doing because the book was coming out of the other pocket so it was slightly out of his eye like it to me and was bit of a -- jokes are jokes because
they're counterintuitive and the problems for john mcdonald as a lot of people think of it, this is what he believes that it's clear from watching them is making a joke. he's laughing but it didn't actually play that way. most importantly that was a really big victory for the labour party, or people including the labour party to force the government back on tax credit if he does that. that. >> not all stunts work in big occasions. >> no. yet be pretty brave, you have to have chosen a right and that was an error. >> george osborne had a witty response which, over was a good autumn statement by the chancellor of? >> he did a good you turn. it was a u-turn that had to happen and take it comprehensively. if you're going to do it, didn't fold and move on. but it was a shock. it was, it was embarrassing
because it shows an error of judgment in trying to do in the first place but i think he should political action and ultimately. >> there is an irony because in a sense they said the comments they can come service at the conservative government funding on the end of a lot of anger from low-income workers. >> and, of course, anger that actually we are talking over christmas that these letters were not due to go out until the new you. a bunch of people out there who didn't even know yet that they're going to be so badly affected. one of the political problems that wasn't yet been felt by people could see coming down the road and lots of them, tory mps were worried about the the reason they did a u-turn, a series but the most board was that extraordinary defeat, the second is that toward backbenchers unhappy, and that probably was the most effective thing the labour party did in
the last 100 days, three months. you're right, really odd to the lords and ladies be the defenders. i would say it isn't odd but it looked odd. >> of course the rewards -- >> the reward is you will not have to do this in the future. what the chancellor targeted is he showed a statutory as a means of he thought because it wasn't a budget bill. a budget bill the lords have to obey more faithfully. he thought it was a way of getting it through without so much bother and may have other ideas about that. they do feel that with the labour party is perhaps not always so focused on the job of the opposition that has some intro debates at the moment that it's their job, assuming it is their job to be the official opposition. but there will be noise about
that in the next few months. >> allegra stratton, thanks very much indeed. the government did reach its revenge. recommended the lord losing its power to veto measures now in its second your legislation in future. they will be able to send these back to the comments for reconsideration but only once put it was a week of turmoil with jeremy corbyn opposed to military action but several members of a shadow cabinet in favor. the labour leader was forced into on a free vote. although the issue is only about extending airstrikes to include syria as well as iraq, attend our comments marathon on the second of december turn into the ultimate decision for mps, to go to war or not. >> and the question is do we work with our allies to degrade and destroy this threat, and then they go after these terrorists in their heartlands from where they are plotting to kill british people or do we sit
back and wait for them to attack us? >> the issue now is whether extending british bombing from iraq to syria is likely to reduce or increase that threat to britain, and whether it will counter or spread their terror campaign isil is waging across the middle east. the answers don't make the case for the government motion. on the contrary, they are warning, step back. >> i am not going to be a party to killing innocent civilians for what will simply be a gesture. i'm not interested in gesture politics. i'm not interested in gesture military activity. >> we should not be in the business of national resignation from the world stage. >> here, here. >> our french allies have explicitly asked us for such
support, and i find the house to consider how we would feel and what we would say if what took place in paris have happened in london come if we had exquisitely asked friends for support, and france had refused. >> i believe that isil/daesh has to be confronted and destroyed if we are to properly defend our country and our way of life. and i believe that this motion provides the best way to achieve this objective. >> paris like the downing of the russian airline were assault up on civilized values. and if we can realistically do something to destroyed or two degrade as the become to prevent it spreading so further, then we must act. >> to my mind i so such a clear and present danger to the civilized world that in all necessary means are endorsed by the security council, and so should this house. >> several mps questioned the
prime minister's assertion that 70,000 moderate troops in syria would help in the fight to destroy isis. >> so, mr. speaker, instead of having dodgy dossiers we done with bogus battalions of moderate fighters. >> i asked the prime minister of those 70,000 how many are moderates and how many are fundamentalists? i have not had an answer to the question and i would invite any member from the government side to tell the rest of the house what that is. >> i share the horror and revulsion. yet i have still to do convincing evidence to suggest that uk bombing isis targets is likely to increase our security here in britain or help bring about lasting piece in the region. >> it is th the toughest call i think i've had to make every effort and certainly in this house. and what pushes me in a direction of voting for action is above all things that united nations resolution to 2249 which
calls or u of to eradicate the safe haven that isis has, daesh has within syria. what kind of the country would we be if we refused to act in the face of a threat to our security as clear as the one that isil posted. indeed, mr. speaker, what kind of a country would we be if we were unmoved by the murder, the rape, the beheadings and the slavery that isil imposes? >> in his winding up speech, the shadow foreign secretary went against convention and spoke in direct opposition to his leaders strongly held views. he argued for military action. >> and we are here faced by fascists. not just the calculator brutality, their belief that they are superior to every single one of us in this chamber
tonight. and all of the people we represent. they hold us in contempt. they hold our values and content. failed i believe in tolerance and decency and content. they hold our democracy, the means by which we will make our decision tonight in contempt. and what we know about fascists is that they need to be defeated. and my view, mr. speaker, is that we must now confront this evil. it is now time for us to do our bit and syria. and that is what i ask my colleagues to vote for this motion tonight. [cheers and applause] >> afterwards in piece voted by a clear majority for military action. >> the ayes to the right, 396 your than those to the left 223.
spent meantime there was a debate on syria in the lords. >> and since our security, the united kingdom, rests on our alliances and her greatest alliances or with the united states and with france, it would be extraordinary we would need a very, very compelling reason if our security come into visible from theirs, not to act with them in this crisis. >> if you launch more you will launch unpredictability the best way are deciding that it is on balance of probabilities this is the best opportunity we will have but there are no certainties. >> the criteria have to, my mind, been met. but while there is, while they are necessary, they are not by themselves sufficient in action of this kind. when we can end up doing the right thing in such a wrong way that he becomes the wrong thing. >> what good does bombing do? it makes the people happy and it
makes some people feel good. it invites retaliation and would make it more. >> a debate in taking military action in both houses, allegra stratton is what they want to get in studio. 10 hours of debate in the comments and a debate in the lords. at the end of the day all we were talking about was extending their flights by the raf a few miles over the border from iraq into syria. why did it turn out to be such a huge issue? >> because two years ago the prime minister asked for permission and was rejected in that famous moment in september 2013 when he came to the house and he said i did it. three words but pretty powerful. and since then he let it be known in social defence secretary that they would like the commission to extend again but because of all the old very, very deep wounds over iraq, people were really, really reluctant. so the prime minister inaugurate
this new convention where he would only do it if parliament gave him the approval which it doesn't technically actually need. to all of us, and the into in our profession, had to spend months watching the whip try to gauge whether not they would get it to get and, of course, with the election of jeremy corbyn who has made his life mission to oppose military intervention of most guys can that change things. we had this huge debate about quite that much of the labour party, jeremy corbyn, would take with them when you have is really rather large group who believes in humanitarian intervention excellent. so it sounds on the surface like this rather very detailed debate about got to stop of the border enter let or can they go ahead. but it was about the commons very reluctantly approving military action. >> a commons classic, t. think
it really altered the voting intentions tha of many mps, or s it more sort of bolstering of the doubters, that it was short of any doubt that they were right in voting for military action? >> they did sway people to get his in the context of the day and also in the context of the week actually which was extraordinary because you had a decision at the dispatch box or later, the opposition camp would see two different opinions but even during the wilson split in the labour party over europe you didn't have to. you had one voice at the dispatch box put in that sense it was an historic day, and historic we grilled the features no less than alan johnson making very direct attacks at people who he believed were issuing death threats to mps who were deciding like himself that strikes had to go and get so a very fraught week for the labour party which saw its party nearly have to of resignation from really split down the middle. some people reporting of threats to the police.
very, very, very visible on an issue that has defined the party for nearly 15 can you do, over 10 years which military intervention is one of the reasons why they are the most part are almost electorally successful, such an unpopular figure in the party. >> where did all that turmoil leave jeremy corbyn? >> in the end he reached the end of the week which was marked by a violation labour kept. labour held onto. he emerged enhance but it is against the background of very low expectations because he did manage to live 66, 66 of these mps decided he wasn't right. he didn't have resignation so he is kept it together but this week started with the possibility, the weekend before, people like me, we were given very serious report that the carbon uses for contemplating whipping the vote to oppose them
at people like tom watson whipping the vote to be able to support strikes. you have for about 4 40 out the possibility that labour could split. it was a very, very, very high-stakes week. >> cross examination by comments commit our future of every westminster turn. often over projects that have gone wrong over budget, or both. the collapse of the charity kids company early this year raised many questions. not least by one charity had soaked up so much public money. kids company was set up to the prized young people britain's inner cities to sort out their lives. and other charismatic founder and chief executive, camila batmangheldijh, one critic claimed senior ministers have become mesmerized by her. she was supported by the charity's chairman alan yentob, former bbc executive. in a committee session questions rained down on the pair. >> we have reports of kids
regularly receiving hundreds of pounds a week. could that be possible? >> no. some did get some received speech some did, so yes the? >> no. know. some, not kids, not under 18, okay? >> you been handing out hundreds of pounds? >> no, i have not been handing out hundreds of pounds. each individual case had to be decided on its own mayor i'll give you an example. >> but you said not under 18. which suggest people operating were receiving hundreds of pounds, is about the case speak was not hundreds of pounds. >> how much spirit it all depended on the circumstances. you wanted to give you an answer without the context and i can't. >> could you just tell me, how do you help someone with mental health by buying them a pair of shoes that cost 100,000? >> excuse me, because i think
the way -- >> this is -- >> hold on. no. the way you put the question is really unjust. because i bashed the i would like to answer it. please let me answer it big because actually the structure of the question is immensely disrespectful to affordable people. because -- no. i want -- >> i think -- >> let her answer, please. >> i would like to answer to get you can have mental health difficulties, and you can still need a pair of shoes. >> do you think it's okay to have adequate resource intensive income and reserve to maintain the level of service that -- >> i think i misrepresented. let's be clear. until 2014, there were no question about the financial resilience of kids company. >> but they were clearly. >> no, i'm sorry.
>> a big piece of -- >> order. order. >> yes from 2014 onward we did have problems but there's no question of the issues around reserve. up to that point for all those years when i was chairing from 2003 until 2014, it was well-run, well managed, in very difficult situations we raised a fund. >> alan yentob talk about kids company. before the politicians left westminster for the christmas break parliament passed a bill that brings in a national referendum on britain's continued membership of the eu. for edwin younger than 59 it would be the first ever such european vote. we know what the likely question will be, not so much yes no, or in out. we even know where the final result would be declared. it will be in this building, in manchester. what we don't know is when the vote wil will be. david cameron embark on issues of talks with european leaders
attempted to secure a better deal for the uk. in late october we finally got out the terms of prime minister wanted to win for britain. but when the europe minister explained what they were, plenty of tory backbenchers were not impressed. >> we want to enable national parliaments to work together to block unwanted european legislation, building on the arrangements already in the treaties. we have proposed that people coming to britain should live here and contribute for four years before they qualify for in work benefits or social housing. >> here, here. >> and that we should end the practice of sending child benefit overseas. >> after all the statements made by the prime minister, my right honorable friend, the four significant the former foreign secretary be injured and not run by europe, they pledge to make national parliament. we saw the prime minister of national parliament restore our borders, after all that, is that
it? is about "the sun" total of the governments position in this renegotiation speak with my right honorable friend must know that this is pretty thin gruel. much less than people have come to expect from the government. it takes out a few words from the preamble but does nothing about the substance of the treaties. it seems to me its whole aim is to help negotiation look respectable. it needs to do more. >> the scottish parliament in edinburgh is never far from mps thoughts in the final months of 2015. comments the put more power following the pledge made by the westminster leaders to secure that rejection by the scots of independence one year ago. but as a counterweight to increasing scottish devolution, the government also came up with a policy for westminster but it was called evil or english votes for english laws. for the first time english mps
would have the final say on england only legislation. the scottish nationalists were not that please. >> that basic principle achieve and say goodbye these is that me and my auto friends here will be second class citizens in the parliament of the united kingdom of great britain and that is at the quite unacceptable. scotland is watching this. scotland is watching this as the mood is targeting. if this is an exercise in saving union, you could not have contrived a by more than a way to save the union. >> it was the people who want to see this. >> we have illegitimately when it comes to this and we reject being second class citizens. this is our parliament as much as first. this is a dirty parliament. and yet we've got to accept the second class status and no wonder the mood is targeting is
common. >> all of us are equal. i can vote on exactly everything that the leader of the house can vote on in this chamber. if this goes through, then from tonight onwards i will be denying the opportunity to vote on the health of the people who elected me on matters which may affect of them. and that is wrong. >> england has waited 18 years for some justice and some power back on this devolution settlement that was forced upon us against our will all those years ago. can my right honorable friend think of any good reason that an english mp could give for voting against these very moderate proposals? >> does he agree with me that this relatively modest proposals do something very powerful, which is allow us to say to our constituents, and i say this as a member of parliament born in belmont, that in future there's no chance of the rest of the united kingdom members of
parliament imposing upon them something that they do not want in england? reason there is so much hostility from the benches opposite is they realize this is a safety valve that will protect the future of united kingdom. >> here, here. >> i couldn't have put it better myself. these proposals come wha with is enable us to give an answer to the question, and entered our constituents visited england will have its own piece of our devolution settlement but they do so without an emphasis can without removing any member of parliament or the workings of this chamber. >> the ottoman truth is to shrink the honest truth is this is not a set of measures. it's quite a danger set of measures. it's a bureaucratic nightmare editing honorable members will regret it. it's as if the prime minister fashioned a new grievance was called and and god knows they've never needed a new grievance because he wanted, because he wanted to antagonize us.
>> what we are debating today is the least worst option on the table, in my view. when we start from this point in a perfect world, no, we wouldn't. >> it seems to me, try to think of it has put forward in these proposals in the way in which they often do on the basis that something has got to be done. the most dangerous watch you will ever hear in parliament. >> mr. speaker, this is a divisive measure. it differentiates between members of parliament, between parts of united kingdom. it doesn't allow us to speak when we want to on behalf of the people who have sent us here. >> the commons voted to change through, the english votes for english laws is in place. >> the ayes to the right 312, then those to the left, 270. >> one labour mp had a suggestion to the speaker. >> now that we have traded different tranches of mp by the
vote this afternoon, would it be convenient for the house to consider issuing different color passes to the different types of mps so that it would be easier for them to be recognized in committees and divisions? >> blue for scottish, red for welsh. >> all examples of her unparliamentary language had been ruled out of order over the years. but what about robot? >> the labour mp john woodcock tested the boundaries in november when he refused to take an intervention. >> i was just explaining the terrible message, this grateful mess that they are making of schools in scotland where the poor children are being left behind. if you wouldn't mind. you see, i would've been happy to take every single one of you robots getting your -- [laughter] i would've been happy, but the
thing is, madam deputy speaker, that the proposed of your motion refused point-blank to take me so i'm not taking any single one of you. >> point of order. i was just turning over in my mind whether the description, robot, for a member of this house would be considered to be derogatory. anti-of come to the conclusion that in some circumstances it might come and in some it might not. [laughter] and for the moment, and for the moment, i am concluding for my own piece of mind that the honorable gentleman was thinking of a high functioning intelligent robot and, therefore, for the moment i will not call him to order for the use of the word. but i'm sure the house will be warned that we should be very careful in our use of language. >> i enjoyed want to give a
allegra stratton. plenty of sound and fury by the scottish nationalists on english votes or anguish laws. this is just a procedural adjustment, what extra stage of consideration for english mps. was this a justified outburst? >> hypertalk of the i do when there's a particular english vote that will require in english welsh perhaps in piece, that scottish mp would come into the division lobbies and squawk there and make this sound and fury. because really there's some principle involved but essentially this is a moment for them to megaphone home to people in scotland at westminster doesn't work for you, and this is one of the other reasons why we should split apart. >> it's been interesting reading about security featuring the scotland person and the prime minister golf course conservatives and snp have much in common. you think the two leaders get on
with? >> until it's a pretty good working relationship and that the two need each other. they have slightly different imperatives. but david cameron needs to not let nicola sturgeon have too many pops at him because he needs to create a sense that the uk is working very well together. nicola sturgeon is a to protect election. she needs have -- certainly the run up to the elections that you should looks like she's still kind of time on the run improving that is not necessary that her people's best interest at heart. and more generally if the snp continue to make the case that david cameron isn't really on your side, then that helps them. but i'm told behind the scenes they get on pretty well. and, of course, remember her predecessor alex salmond it was a much more contemptuous relationship and who is much more prone to walk straight out of the meeting with a conservative prime minister, or any prime minister, and have some fun with it.
that's not her style. >> the european union, we can't not mention it. the eu referendum. that bill has cleared parliament so the reference and the legislation is going alone. now, david cameron has had not a tremendous a successful few months. it's not looking good for him, isn't? >> i'm quite surprised how they have handled this. it is looking good for them in there's a view inside downing street would like to do things very quickly. they don't want it to dominate all of this parliament and you get into a june referendum you can avoid the prospect of another migrant crisis, the images of people on television screens fling syria try to get into your. when that happened last summer council a tiny, tiny spike, believe they showed a tiny spike in support for the camp. 10 downing street is let's get this done quickly and the referendum becoming law quite soon allows that to be possible. it's a thorny issue that nobody
yet knows where they will end up with this on this issue of immigration and to partake of tax credits. why i despise the end of this at the moment they're looking visibly on the back bumper we are not getting what we want to imagine what david cameron, we are not getting what he wants on tax credits. there are a series of compromises all of which are probably too complicated for here, but the comfort is the lead can't get we don't know yet who that is but if it can't can get up and running that on immigration it was what attracted want in the first place, that could harm him. >> 2016, will jeremy corbyn spring a few surprises himself? >> i think that the jeremy corbyn, unless -- my profession has its income entirely possible on recent efforts, but i think he's around for a very long time. i think the key test for him will be the may elections.
the question will be if you have patchy results for labour, so if it looks like they don't do well in scotland may be the tories beat them to second place but they did get the london mayoralty to beat a goldsmith which is possible. it could be the jeremy corbyn has another firework to protect himself. and so after that point there's a possibility in september the people close to him change the leadership roles or at least make them workers with easier for him not to be challenged. but essentially those who oppose another window between may and september, and i'm not sure they can move against them. >> we will see what happens. thanks very much indeed for joining us on the "westminster in review." >> total pleasure spill we'll see if predictions come true in 2016. as we know parliament not a debate of the big issues like syria and the nations finances and welfare cuts. and also debate the issues slightly lower down the priority scale. in november can have the debate
on these fellows. should the humble hedgehog becomes a national symbol for britain? and give for the nation what the springbok does in south africa and the kangaroo for australia to a conservative mp is concerned about the dwindling numbers of the british hedgehog. >> in a bbc wildlife poll, hedgehogs were chosen as the best national emblem for the british nation, beating the charismatic badger and the sturdy elk or the victory for the ultimate underdog came about with 42%, more than 9000 those being cast for the hedgehog. >> aristotle points out that the hedgehog carries apples on his spine into his nest. seville argues that hedgehog travels with grapes invaded on his spikes. but i would like to challenge of
the honorable member at the hedgehog should become our national symbol. i ask you, madam deputy speaker, i asked both sides of the south because this is not a question that concerns only one party, but all of us, do we want to have as our national symbol an animal which when confronted with danger rolls over into a ball and puts it spikes up? do we want to have as our national symbol in animal that sleeps for six months of the year? or would we rather return to the animal that is already our national symbol? only for of course, madam deputy seek -- secretary, to the line. majestic, courageous, proud. >> willie stewart showing some unique knowledge about hedgehog. and a year beckons. there will be no shortage of events happen each day in the commons and the lords. we will be here with our daily about it at 11 p.m. each evening.
for now for me, keith macdougal, goodbye. ♪ ♪ >> 2015 wraps up c-span presents congress, year in review to look back at all the newsmaking issues, debates and hearings that took center stage on capitol hill this year. join us thursday at 8 p.m. eastern as we revisit mitch mcconnell taking his position as senate majority leader. pope francis historic address to a joint session of congress, the resignation of house speaker john boehner and election of paul ryan. the debate over the nuclear deal with iran and reaction from congress on mass shootings here and abroad, gun control, terrorism and the rise of isis. congress year in review on c-span thursdays at 8 p.m.
eastern. >> former president bill clinton will hit the campaign trail for his wife hillary and host issues of what the presidential candidates campaign is calling grassroots organizing events in new hampshire on monday january 4. hillary clinton is campaigning in the state today and has a town hall coming up. it's scheduled to get under way shortly. tonight on c-span a look back at figures from the entertainment world speaking out on a variety of issues peculiar from the dynasty the robertson, elton john and ben affleck as most actors ellen page the talks are coming out of the closet at the human rights campaign's annual dinner. >> there was a time when i thought it would be impossible to be out. and 18 months ago with the help of your love and support, i shared my story.
that everything changed for me. and i'm still feeling the effects of that moment today. and i know how lucky i am to be in this decision. i think you'll remember the pain i was in before i was out. and i've been able to experience a lot of things for the first time in the last year and a half. [cheers and applause] having my arms wrapped around my girlfriend samantha while we walk down the street. [cheers and applause] holding her hands on the red carpet, kissing her in the ocean while we serve. yes, she has taught me to serve. [laughter] and getting to say in public, i am in love.
>> you can hear more about what celebrity activists are saying tonight on c-span at 8 p.m. eastern. public protest as well as a separate meetings among law enforcement are scheduled in cleveland today after the announcement yesterday that the officers involved in the shooting death of 12 year-old tamir rice would not be indicted. up next on c-span2 we hear from -- to address what he considers quote systemic problems in the criminal justice system including what happened in the tamir rice case. this is about an hour and a ha half. >> this semester that a number of incidents that suggest a real need to open dialogue about rape on this campus and others. tonight's event is free and open to the public like all national agenda events. i encourage audience participation promote body to individual as well as the social media.
tweet at ud race in america and you can join the discussion. your tweet can make it into the conversation tonight. it should be sent along with the candidates and sincerit sincerim civil unrest that the dollar is expected. so as i said all semester, as for the last of how they sang at this semester if you would not stand up and say in public, don't tweet it. mitchell hall, look around you. know that we are all here to get a better understanding of race in america and on this campus. the candid but also be courteous. so tonight the founder of the national coalition of law enforcement officers for justice reform and accountability. this coalition includes current and former police officers from around the country who are committed to challenging the institutional racism that is at the foundation of our criminal justice system and its fountain please culture throughout america.
is also the board chair for the sake of those missouri-based ethics project, focused on addressing problems in america's present industries and beginning with ending the school to present my plan. mr. hudson was racial justice manager and program associate for the american civil liberties union of eastern missouri and is also a former st. louis police officer. he left the force in 19 identical on addressing specific problems in the criminal justice system, abused police authority and approving the police committee relationship or if he is a the critical investigative report suffering in silence which catalogs human rights abuses in st. louis jails. and has led to formal actions to address the conditions in them. please join me in welcoming redditt hudson to the university of delaware. [applause]
>> thank you. thank you for having me. everybody can hear me pretty good? great. they have been running iraqi today, i'm going to tell you. i've had quite the day. i'm getting my second win now and they're glad to be your with you to talk about race in america, and more importantly for me to talk about police community relations, and some of the dynamics that we've seen relative to raise in the united states in the last 18, 24 months. i think it's important and i'm very glad to have this opportunity to speak to you and potential if they decide to run any part of this on c-span, the country from a very different perspective, from law enforcement. and my colleagues also sure law enforcement background, a lot of times are the mainstream
presentation of police points of view, you don't hear from officers who understand the history of policing in america and the relationship between police and the black communities that they serve in urban, poor committees across this country. so just to tell you about who i am before i get started, my name is redditt hudson. i'm a lot of things. i'm a father, a son, a former st. louis university basketball player, former racial justice manager at the aclu. currently raging field organization for the naacp, although i'm not here today in a capacitor i'm speaking stood in the capacity of my position as cofounder and the board chair of the ethics project. and i've had to talk to you tonight as candidly as i can in a space in our history where
your generation talking to the college students here, and the organizers on this campus and around the country have put us in a position to expect real change, we'll change. and that has to happen. so to lay the foundation for you i want to share some things with you about my experiences when i was on the department. and then i will get to my remarks. to give you a sense, a foundational sense of some of what this movement that you've seen grow from ferguson all the way around the world has been vilified, wrongfully in so many corners, is really about. so early in my career, i was working with an officer, female
officer. this officer happened to be a white female officer hired by -- is the only white officers who abuse their authority you have black officers who do, asian offices, hispanic officers who do it. consistently in black and brown communities and sometimes in poor white communities across this country. but i was working with this officer early in my career and we got a call and it was a call for an officer needing aid. and officer in need of aid for anybody who's in law enforcement in the room can anybody who knows law enforcement officers, an officer needs paid call is a very serious culprit it means all officers in the geographic arrangement is called in earshot of his call, stop whatever you're doing and expedite to the officers location. ..
i think he went in the house. he picked a house at random. we go up to the house and gets to the door, she had her flashlight, hit the door as hard as she could, opened this door, i'm not going to use the language. we know somebody's in here and we are coming in here to bring you out. we don't do with anybody is in the house or not but from the back of the house with the rocket we created in the front we begin to see a shape approached the door committee was indoor, glass in the center and moving about the speed right here slowly getting to door. the door opens, cracked him a standing in the door as a kid about 19-years-old,
african-american and i'm standing there remind you i'm sick speed 8 inches out of shape right now. [laughter] but at the time i was working out every day. about 265, 270. i had on a short sleeve shirts that is a size medium. was this small on purpose. he opens the door and she says i don't know what you're talking about. i live here because you. i'm here by myself right now but you've got the wrong house is. as soon as he got the took the words out of his mouth she
grabbed him and took him to the edge of that urge in st. louis it's an elevator and they set up real high. i'm sure that if somebody hits you like that generally you will do one of two things. you are going to put up your hands and try to block something else that may be coming in or you may offer up some discouragement. i don't know if she was trying to engage or want.
it's happening fast so i see this and at this point i go over and grabbed the uniformed officer in my uniform to check out the side of the porch. but i tell you it is an officer in need in the area to expedite to this location. he had canceled the call and slowed them down some that didn't slow them down from policing because if you understand the police work you know people want to see what it was about so they came anyway. now up that this tax cut and the blackhawks. take him up the steps and he looks at me and looks at the veteran officer that i had in the corner and he goes what's
going on, what happened, what's going on here. they said that sop insulted me and tried to interfere with what i was going to do and the officer said yeah so she goes off to the guy and says get up. he says uci can't get up and the officer says get the fill in the blank up and he said uci can't get up and out and he grabbed him and picked him up and slammed him into the house and his hands are behind his back. and the kid is still leaning against the house and he's saying get down and get in the car because i'm taking you in for interfering with an arrest
indicated was leaning on the house looking at him and he said it will never forget the look in his eyes it was was anger, hurt, surprise, fear, all of that because he was looking at this brother in front of him thinking why are you doing this to me and he said one more time i can't go the officer dropped down and grabbed him by his ankles. if you have your hands bound behind your back and you can't move and somebody grabs you by your ankles and pulls up as hard as they can, what do you think happens? you hit your head pretty hard, and he did. he drugged him drove him down the porch and down the front and threw him in the car. we got back to the station and we were all in the room and we all get into first female
officer says to me what he taught you something if you ever interfere with me again while i'm doing police work, that's how she characterized what she had done, police work, i will never ride with you again area that's already a good idea. the other officer made him go back and forth a little bit and the sergeant comes in and here's what's going on there yet we have work to do. we don't have time for this. so we all went back into service and that was that. what always bothered me about that encounter and what always stayed with me until this very day was the reason the kid kept telling the officer you see i can't go. i can't go. the reason he was saying that is because when he first came to the door and saw me and the
other officer standing there and he cracked that were open, he was standing there on crutches. she took him off his crutches to do that to him and nobody was in the house and it was his home. and he was in violation of no law. i have one more for you to set the foundation and then we will talk. young kid, 21, 22 at the time. committed by police officers in st. louis and a traffic stop one
of those checkpoint situations where you set up a checkpoint and anything that comes through has to stop and he is at a checkpoint one night and he stops at the officer is at a distance and he can't understand what the officer instructing him to do or want him to do. and so he gets out of his car to find out more about what he needs to do because he has somewhere to be. he gets out of the car. he would play but spring because he needs to do so that he can move through the checkpoint instead of offering an explanation for his simple act of noncompliance which these days can get you killed.
the officer proceeds to insult him physically, chokes him up with me, i is burning and they are getting ready to arrest him for assault on an officer again. anytime the police beat you up the church you with resisting arrest. i don't know if you know that or not and he pleads his case. and at some point, one of the supervising officers arrived into the decision is made to finally let him get medical attention which they initially denied to him. it caused him to miss his flight back for his second tour of duty
the soldier described to me how he felt that he had no right here in the united states and how he had always felt this way because the police have always treated him. it's disappointing to say the least. these kinds of experiences are part of the dalia reality of people all over this country particularly in the urban america and you need to fully understand that when you see black lives matter, this is what they are talking about.
it's not the only thing they are talking about what they are talking about the real world experiences of people people come and they are tired -- we are tired. this is generations old. fathers and sons, mothers and daughters have experienced this going back to who knows when and there's been zero accountability for the policies that you see all the time in the mainstream media. this is where we are.
we had seen no accountability for the officers that violate the human rights of the liberties. eric garner murdered in front of us make no mistake, on the street as he pleaded for his wife, life come and officer using an illegal chokehold barred by his own department policy police the police union president, chen and chest out not only justified in this murder but calling on his officers to turn their backs on
the mayor of new york for having the nerve to describe the experience of him and his family when he talks to his kids about how to deal with the police. he would do better to have his officers stopped turning their backs on the human rights and the protections of the constitution but extended to all the citizens that he served he would do much better in that order. she encountered an officer and rightfully any nonsense stop and who correctly serves the rights under the constitution only to be met with the contempt of the officer for having the nerve to insert her rights to him.
he's asking her to know come he's directing her to put out a cigarette after the summons that he was issuing. their interaction is done is find the police and i am on the street with you and you have received a summons for me and we have conducted our business timeout is a. it would escalate to the point where i am telling you i'm going to lights you up. i'm going to he with this 50,000 volts because i don't like your attitude. we have got to come to a place where the officers see the inherent dignity of everyone and every life. the people they serve in their communities. i just want to go through a few and the first is very specific to cause we do have some media coverage here.
for people to hear a different perspective of law enforcement and one that acknowledges the reality of our ugly history when it comes to race and racism and institutional racism in our criminal justice system. shot within two seconds of exiting the vehicle this was an officer that had a history of failure in his performance area. the department that he left to go through the cleveland police department said he was unfit for duty particularly when it relates to firearms and in the report that comes out he thinks he saw him reaching for his waistband but it could be a toy gun. for you to pull right up on the shooter is just asinine. but then you fire within two seconds and then the sister shows up and you put her on the ground and in the back of the
car before you even administer help to this child. that happens in black communities with a. shouldn't have happened. but the officers that shot that could have been indicted quickly and $1 million bond set for both of them. he didn't leave his home in april 2015 with a broken back and a crushed windpipe and he didn't give it to himself but yet officers would assert that the case and become an indignant when we don't be leave them. the state's attorney from baltimore who had the courage and the integrity to indict the officer was met with the
vitriolic and aggressive response and a tax on her and her family by the police union and the officers because i'm telling you they want zero accountability. none. that's why the movement you see growing around you and the unity that you created among you and the communities you come from whether it is black, white, hispanic, whatever religion that's why they unity that you don't is so vital to the change that we need to see because historically there has been no recognition of the value of black life in this country, period and it's okay to say black lives matter. yes, we've had our moments area there've been moments when people of all races have come together and have given us some
victories but there's never been in the history of this country never a consensus nationally that says everyone here should be equally valued in every process that we have and we all agree to that. that's always been at least half the country millions of people, more than half sometimes he would fight that with everything in them, everything in them. that's the american reality. i'm talking about the american reality when it comes to precedent there is good reason for the officers to be sure that they won't be held accountable especially when it comes to black life.
he was attending to be and shoots at a child that he physically fought while outweighing him at 100 pounds. but he gets off on the floor to stand your ground law. contrast that with marissa alexandre's case in florida, a woman who upon being confronted by a man that had a history of physically and brutally assaulting her and who in that moment announced to her that he was about to physically and brutally assaulted her again she produced a weapon and said no you're not and she fired a shot, a warning shot in florida hitting no one, killing no one and she was sentenced to 20 years in prison. was distracted by race and
racism gets as a result like that and if you can be leave a lot of people in florida were good with that. the last case i want to talk about nationally i know i'm unlimited time, michael brown. he was killed ten minutes from my house by darren wilson and ferguson. there were credible witnesses that described the scene of the shooting that contradicted their in wilson's account and it's a case that should have been tried on the facts in front of a jury that a prosecutor was determined to prevent that and attempted in front of the grand jury and told them to sort through it, which included the testimony of a witness for whom it had been established as fact as she could not have been and was not physically present at the time
he was shot. this was a prosecutor who has a history of that kind of thing. 20 years earlier a notorious shooting on a jack in the box parking lot was filled with students from the local school and the police carry out an operation where the students were with two suspects killing them both, both of them unarmed, one of them gainfully employed father that goes to a grand jury and is later discovered that to the grand jury and to the public after words he lied about key elements of testimony in the case, key elements of her he does this with it and he was allowed to leave and get his story straight. much was made about what michael brown may or may not have been doing that day.
there was a criminality and it's common in this country. we don't always handle poor choices that way. i was randomly on the web the other day and i came across something about an actor named mark wahlberg. everybody knows that is, show of hands. famous guy. he brutally assaulted two men. on the tape that they showed me,
he shoved somebody that you had officers and officials and elected the people saying that's enough his death is warranted because look at the kind of kid he was. good thing we gave mark wahlberg a chance to get his wife. it's a good thing we saw that he was reading about. what about black on black crime, what about people say or ask what are the protests when blacks kill other blacks as if that is an offset for the human rights violations, civil rights violations and the brutality we see when people are sworn to protect and serve us. first, people commit crimes. they are against the people around them, where you live.
so black on black, white on white, hispanic on hispanic. it's crime. a better question is what is the coverage of the organized efforts to address violence in the black amenities that take place over time in st. louis. i've been a part of many of them and many of my colleagues are invested in ongoing continuous decades long efforts to push back against the kind of things we see contributing to violence in the communities and directly addressed it address it at the community level and grassroots level. in some cases door-to-door. what we haven't been able to do is slow that the funding of the already under resourced public education, slow chronic underemployment or slow the mass incarceration that results from an equities legislated into the wall and the targeted enforcement that follows. deprivation and hopelessness you put those together anywhere and you will get what you guess whether that's in st. petersburg
, russia, poland, st. louis missouri, the bahamas, wherever you create those conditions you will have what you have. it's not mysterious but it's not only the violence that we talk about when we address it in our communities and i think it's important to talk about this because what it comes down to for us is the lost futures, young people losing their lives, we lost that future. what he or she might have been, what might he or she have given to us. what have we lost, our future. but i will tell you this lets be clear there is violence in our community that is a problem and i will tell you specifically the problem i have with it in a minute with a number the number lost to violence in our communities doesn't begin to approach the number lost in our communities to a criminal the
criminal justice system that is at its core commands traditionally racist and works in concert with a private prison industry that trades privately on the stock market and insists through its legislative lobby the state ensure the prisoners they contract to build and run for profit remain 90% occupied. i will say this about the issue in the specific problems i have with it. it pains me to that our young people, descendents of the community but have been targeted for suffering and abuse, marginalization and deprivation, enslaved, exploited, diminished at every turn without turning
the gun on us and each other. that's part of it pains me. look at what's happening in chicago and st. louis and other cities and i pray for a raised consciousness to get a clear picture of who they are and where they are and how we got where we are. moreover i would call out our entertainers, the ones who profit from the death of our brothers who move a message in our community that the death of your brother is your mission in life and if it is not your mission, you are nothing with us and who profit from sending their place into us and who see the blood on the streets and
doesn't change the reality of the problems and issues that we have to come to grips with as a country move forward. can't sweep it under the rug or say look at that over there, none of it. equal treatment under the law is not the american reality. we will have to dig deep within ourselves and i will take this, to make the discussion more comfortable, let me say this and not just in this room, but nationally, for the nation, here's how to make this racial discussion that we talk about black and white, but we have other races in this country also, black and white, here's how to make that discussion more discuss-- more comfortable. understand it and we can go forward. the problems i'm talking about here tonight and that i talk about in all the places i discuss them when it comes to race and racism and institutional racism in our history with it, no one in this auditorium tonight is under indictment, the white people in
the room is under indictment for any of this. why? because you didn't create the conditions. we were all born into this reality. it was like this when we got here. this is what we were born into, man. you didn't do this. trust me, it was like this when you showed up. if you are alive now, our responsibility is to acknowledge fully what that reality is, not the narrative, the reality of our history is and where it has us now and do something about it , collectively together. that's our role. that's what will allow us to have this discussion and as i prepare to close because i was told i only have 30 minutes and i know i'm getting there, there are things that we can do. things to change the dynamic
between police and communities that they serve, the police community relationship and the breakdown in it was the genesis of the movement that we see. of course, it has expanded to include discussion of race and impact across all our system with utah about education, employment, health care, you name it. but, relative to police and community, the first and foremost peace that we have to address is accountability. accountability. there is already plenty of good training and i heard people talk about this training and that training. we have got great training already and that officers receive, but it's worthless if you don't have officers that adhere to the policy and don't be held accountable. eric garner, murdered while officers violated their own policies to take his life and no
one is held accountable. all we get is his chin up in his chest out looking like a doofus. accountability is everything and it starts from inside the system. one of the things that i would like to see and ncl lj, which is a diversion group of current and former officers from coast-to-coast, lh to new york and one of the things i would like to see us become involved in is doing movement within the criminal justice system itself nationally, starting with people who come from affected communities, black and brown communities who work in the criminal justice-- justice system, judges, attorneys, police officers, correction officers, whoever you are and where villar we can collect ourselves within the system and demand changes we want to see relative to how it operates in our community and have functions in our community.
there are enough of us and its rights. we have the moral high ground here, man. that's one of the things i would like to see. another thing i think would go a long way towards resolving some of the issues we have seen is a special prosecutor. in all cases involving the use of force by police officer resulting in serious injury or death, the relationship between prosecutors and police departments are too close to have a reasonable expectation that the prosecutor will go after any officer in the department that they work in alliance with almost 100% of the time. he is a prime example of that. he was recently sued after mike brown's case, recently sued in the last month or two by a grand jury that he can legally remove from the grand jury because he thought he had a propensity to look at things differently. a former aclu attorney. i think i know who he is. they have an ounce's name, but
i'm pretty sure. take him off the grand jury in violation of state law. do you think they don't shape outcomes? do you think they don't decide who gets justice and who doesn't? which leads me to my next point, in cases involving police misconduct and use a police force that result in serious injury or death, the limited the grand jury. yes, eliminate the grand jury. this a secretive process that into many cases involving police , misconduct result in the elimination of accountability for police officers because the prosecutor has advocated for the officer in front of the grand jury, so they won't have to be tried on the facts. it is that warhead arguments for indictment take place with the public can be present. the last thing i would tell you is to support the movement that
you see. it's american movement. don't be afraid of black life matter. these are young people who are american citizens just like you, but they want their rights recognized in their right to live and their right to dignity, recognized. it's not negotiable for them. it's not up for really discussion. they are citizens here to, and they fully understand the history. so, as i close my remarks on the first of all amazed i was able to get through them. i thought i was out on my feet when i came in this room. they ramey raggett today. i had no idea what i was in poor when i got up at 4:30 a.m. this morning to fly to delaware, but i'm glad i came and i appreciate you giving me your time and valuing what you thought i might
have to say enough to be here tonight. i look forward to engaging you. the questions need to be respectful and they do, but nothing is off limits. even challenge me or ask me or you can say because i believe in freedom of dialogue and i believe that's the way to move forward. thank you for your patience with me tonight. thank you. [applause]. was that too long? >> no, you're fine. thank you for being here. you are the final speaker in this series we have had all semester long about race in america and we have talked about the black life matter movement, the civil rights movement, so you are here kind of in this unique role as having served as a police officer and now kind of speaking out against the uncivil things you saw.
as the cofounder of the national coalition of law enforcement for justice report on account ability, a long name, how did you go from being a police officer to holding the same officers accountable? >> it wasn't a huge transition. when i came to the department, i can with the same ideologies, the same personal philosophy, the same disposition, everything about me was the same when i joined the department. i think ultimately that's what led to me leaving not work because i am when i am. i was profoundly disillusioned, more than i was before i became a police officer. i became humbly disillusioned with the criminal justice system in the united states and the conduct of some of my colleagues in particular. i knew i had to stop being a part of that system. libby be clear about this because i realize i haven't said this tonight and i think it's
important that i do. there are good police officers. there are good police officers. there are good people do read it very difficult job under very difficult circumstances who have to make very difficult decisions sometimes. they deserve our support. because it is a tough job. my contention is that the number of officers that will willfully abuse their authority and your human rights in your civil rights is too big a number to not have a systemic policy response in place to deal with those people. but, there are good officers in the country. >> i'm going to poll up-- this will work your. so, you had a couple of op ads or editorials that have come out in the past year talking about your experiences as a police officer. i recommend people looking at
these two articles from the "washington post". so, my students said you spoke about this is-- the store you spoke about, the young black man with the crutches was frustrating and upsetting to read about. were there other situations you have encountered like that during your time with the police force? >> the situations i have encountered and situations i have been made aware of, it's a very common experience to see. peoples rights abused for little to no reason at all, for simple acts of noncompliance. yes, i am aware of for example, a colleague and it's very interesting because him and i initially were probably-- i wouldn't say we were adversaries, but not necessarily best buddies. his father was chief of police at one point for the st. louis
city police department and then his dad got into politics, op. cit. a guy who was the first african-american in the history of st. louis that i worked on his security detail in his name was friedman bobby junior and i was on one of his security details. i used to be in shape. i'm telling you, but this guy while he was in the department he was in the bureau, the detective bureau and he walked in and he was a sergeant and he walked in on one of his officers who was threatening a blacked-- black subject in a chair with a taser held out his genitals telling him he was going to tell him what he wanted to know when he was going to say what he wanted him to say or else. and my colleague walked in on that and he stopped it rightfully and he wrote the guy up. he seized the taser and immediately as you would expect, he was ostracized, marginalized,
the guy who stopped it, the sergeant, blackballed, we don't deal with you. i was the only person who showed up, him and his dad, ironically, only two people to showed up in support of him. every other officer in the union and everywhere else was aligned against him, how dare he stop him from threatening this a suspect and ruin his good name. so, incidents like that, i'm telling you, i can impress upon you enough, these are not isolated few and far between kind of things. these things are part of the daily lived experience and the collective experience of a black people all over this country. >> so, 15 years out of your experience in the st. louis police department. i have a picture up here from demonstrators who were reacting after learning the police officer who shot michael brown
would not face charges. this is just about year ago on november 24. fifteen years out of being out of the police force what was your reaction when you heard officer darren wilson would not be charged for markel brown's death? >> disappointed and not surprise. i knew whose hands the case within. robert macola was doing everything he could. it was clear early on he was going to do if he could to avoid holding darren wilson accountable and i wasn't surprised by it, nor was i surprised by the reaction of the community. let me share something with you to give you a sense of the community. you see those young people turn up. here's what they have lived. here's what their parents have lived, i gave up no your rights workshop about four months ago in st. louis, during which at the end of it a gentleman in his
mid- 50s, early 60s stood up and said, you know what, when i was coming up as a young man, a police officer saw me moving furniture out of an apartment and came to question me about it maybe he was stealing it or taking it, but no, he was moving from one apartment to another apartment and he explained to the white officer that i'm moving and i'm going to move from this apartment to this apartment because i'm taking my stuff out. later that same day in the evening at night the same officer had him face down in the mud with a shotgun at his head accusing him of stealing. saying he was taking things from an apartment, same officer. that took place 30 years ago where mike brown lived. thirty years ago. so, imagine the accumulated experience in history of the people in that community and then when they see, as i told
you, we had a credible witnesses, credible witnesses that contradicted darren's story it was never sent to trial and no one got a chance to hear the credible testimony against the facts that darren wilson presented and even if you accept his virgin, even if you accept his version, as an officer if i'm using deadly force because i feel threatened or you are a threat to me, why did you fire any shots at michael brown while he was running away from you? if i'm moving away and my friend to you now? in my threatening you? mif right? why are you firing at me? you don't think he had a weapon because your statement was he was wrestling and fighting with you over yours. and you retained it. he didn't get it, so he had nothing.
it should have went to trial. >> well, in addition to your work with looking at police behavior, you have also done some research on human rights abuses in particularly the st. louis city jails. you release this report, suffering in silence, available online in 2009. it demonstrated numerous human rights abuses in the st. louis city jail. what has changed since then? >> not munch. initially, the city was in complete and utter denial and we were told we had some agenda and none of that was true and ultimately everything we alleged in the report was proven to be true and then some. they are facing a number of lawsuits now based on the kinds of conduct and behavior we described in the report, but systemic changes is difficult. you had to have people inside the system who acknowledge the problem and also work to change it