Ms Hannah here, I thought we can get the clearance a lot. Is that okay? Ready to go? Okay. Thank you. So ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your invitation. I'm delighted to be here today in Dublin, and in particular at a time that is so important for our continent. We are clearly at a cross-road at a moment of great divide. Europe is dividing while another part of the world is gathering around new silk roads. In almost every open nation, two parts of society are facing each other. Those who benefit from globalization and those who are left out. And this divide has one main consequence. The rise of nationalism and populism all over Europe. It is true in Italy. It is true in France where it is at the root of the gilet jaune protest. It is true in the United Kingdom where Brexit is the political translation of the social and economic divide. If Europe is unable to reconcile these two parts of our societies, it is clearly the end of the European project. And if the European project fails, then I believe that everyone of our countries will fail. Because none of us will be able to compete alone against giants such as the United States and China. The EU has always known turmoil and upheavals. But the crisis it is now going through is deeper and I would say more existential. But I believe that this is in times of great uncertainty that we make and that we can make the best choices. When it comes to Brexit, let me be clear. France and the EU have stood by Ireland over the last couple of years. And you can continue to count on our full support, our full solidarity, whatever the coming weeks and months bring. We also need to be able to look ahead past Brexit. Brexit is not the key question. The key question is the future of Europe. And now it is the time to build all together a new European project. A sovereign, ambitious and reassuring project for Europe and all Europeans. And I think we need to work on three key aspects to deliver that. The first aspect is the need to reinforce our common currency. When you are looking at the past, I think that the two most important achievements over the last two decades are on the one side the single market and on the other side our common currency. But we need to reinforce it. The euro is one of the biggest success of the EU. It has simplified trade for our business and life for our citizens. And it has strengthened us on the world stage. If we still play a role on the international stage, it is because of our common currency. But we also know and you in Ireland know that better than most than the euro has its weaknesses. Much has been done since the crisis to remedy that but we have not finished the work. For the eurozone to be a success for generations to come, our system needs to be more sustainable. We are not yet fully equipped should we face new financial or economic crisis. And our economies are clearly diverging a cause of concern for all. We cannot in the long run have a common currency and diverging economies. It will mean the end of the common currency. That is why we want to deepen the eurozone with the creation of a eurozone budget aimed at improving both convergence and competitiveness within the European economies. The principle of this budgetary instrument for the eurozone was agreed last December. Now we need to agree on the modalities for the budget to become a reality in 2021. This will be a new decisive phase for our economic and monetary union. We will start the process of discussing and agreeing together priorities for public investments and competitiveness. It makes a lot of sense when you are part of one economic area sharing a common currency. The budget will also help us boost our resilience against crisis and bounce back more quickly and ensure the euro is a stable global reference currency. I know Ireland is keen that our monetary union is better prepared to weather new crisis and challenges. We therefore hope and count on Ireland's support in the coming weeks. The second pillar is the need for a European industrial strategy. We must maintain strong industrial production in Europe. Otherwise, we will lose both essential jobs for our citizens and our technological sovereignty. And if we lose our technological sovereignty, we will also lose our economic independence in the long run. This industrial strategy is for that very simple reason key for the future of Europe. You cannot imagine any continent, any nation playing the first role in the 21st century without having a strong industry and without having an independence in the production of new disruptive technologies. The first key issue is to pull off strength. We have to gather our industrial strength to create industrial champions. Since Airbus, very few European industrial champions have emerged while Chinese, Indian or American champions are appearing every year. One of the reasons is that European competition rules are totally outdated. We need to agree on a new set of rules more in tune with the challenges facing us. It's a question of economic realities. The world economy is more brutal, faster than ever, and less fair than we had got used in recent decades. We have to take that into account. In the forthcoming European elections, we will campaign for a renewal of European competition law to take place in the next commission. If we want Europe and our European companies to have all the tools to compete and succeed, we have to reinvent these rules for the 21st century. And we cannot anymore rely on the rules defined on the 20th century to be successful for the 21st century. The second quick question is to innovate. For innovation, it's key to ensure our industry remains competitive. That's why France has decided to create a 10 billion euro fund for disruptive innovation. And we will sell public assets in Aéroport de Paris, in NG, in La France, to fund that 10 billion euro fund for disruptive innovation. And we strongly hope that this national fund will pave the way for a similar European fund. We all can have our own and separate fund at the national level in France, in Ireland, or in Germany, but then we won't be able to complete with the US or with China. If we want to fund the necessary research in artificial innovation in the storage of renewable energies in the storage of data, we need to gather the funding of all European countries. It is also when we are looking at the past why we need a capital markets union. It is critical to finance innovation. Why is there no European Google or no European Apple? It is not a matter of creativity or talent. It is a matter of access to finance above all. And today we are lagging behind our main rivals. Let me remind you some interesting figures on venture capital financing in the world in 2018. 100 billion euros in the United States, 80 billion euros in China, and only 20 billion euros in Europe. Just have a look at those figures and you will better understand why there is an American Google, an American Amazon, and not a European giant. We need to invest more to stay in the innovation race on artificial intelligence, on space, on energy storage, the technologies of the future require massive investment. And we are not doing right now what we should do to fund innovation in Europe. But innovation is not just a matter of financing. It is also a matter of smart industrial partnership. That is what we are doing with Germany and Poland on fourth generation batteries. And that is what we must do on artificial intelligence, perhaps even more important than electric batteries. Let's remind that Europe was powerful in the 20th century because of its success in the 19th century industrial revolution. To be powerful in the 21st century, Europe must become a global leader on artificial intelligence. And we have all the assets for that. Top universities, engineers, data scientists, and great innovation policies is only a matter of willingness and decision. It's time to decide if we want to keep a strong industry. It's time to gather our funding if we want to be at the right level facing the competition with China and the United States. And if we remain divided on that key question of industry and innovation, we will lose the race and the competition among the greatest nations of the world. The third key point is to protect. When you develop a new technology, it does not come from free. It requires billions of public and private investments and years of work. We cannot let these technologies be spied upon or simply stolen. France has reinforced its control over foreign investments in key sectors. And I'm glad that Europe has recently voted for rules to also screen such third-country investments in key sensitive areas. We must, of course, remain attractive for new foreign investments. It's the key reason we have carried out so many big reforms in France in the last year to attract such foreign investments. But we also need to be less naive in Europe and to be capable of protecting ourselves when national security and national sovereignty is at stake. Protecting our industry also means protecting our capacity to trade as we choose. Along with Britain and Germany, we have created a new financial vehicle called Instex. It will enable our SMEs to avoid unfair extraterritorial sanctions and to trade freely when it is legitimate to do so. The third pillar of our European strategy is to better fulfil the expectations of the Europeans. What are these expectations? More fairness, more solidarity among European nations, more protection, and a more inclusive and sustainable economic model. Our population expects Europe to build a new model for capitalism. An essential part of this new model is to have a fairer tax system. I'm well aware that even mentioning tax system is a sensitive issue here in Dublin. But I'm convinced that among France we should discuss all those issues very openly and in a friendly manner. I respect the fact that taxation is above all an issue of national sovereignty but no country today lives in a hermetic bubble. The first issue is digital taxation at the European level. For years you have been a hub for innovation. Digital champions have been attracted to Ireland where they could enjoy full access to Europe's single market and low tax rates. These have brought much to Ireland and to the Irish but also at a price for other Europeans. Citizens cannot accept that their personal data is used by digital giants who make enormous value from those data without that value being properly taxed. Companies cannot accept paying 14 points more than digital giants when it comes to corporate tax. It's a question of fairness and states cannot accept the situation where billions in tax are lost to tax optimization thus limiting their ability to finance public goods including health and education. We need to change the international tax system. And we need to adapt it to the realities of the 21st century when you have new internet giants, when you have value created by data. You have to take that into account to build a new international taxation system that would be fairer and more efficient. Changing our approach to taxation is the only sustainable model. We all know that deep down the prosperity of our nations and our citizens depends on all companies and individuals paying their fair share of tax. There is a growing consensus amongst countries on this and even many digital companies have understood it is in their interest to move and to change our mind. That is why Pascal Donyeu and myself have agreed to work together to develop a joint position on these issues at the OECD level. I will also continue to promote the need for legislation at the European level on digital taxation. And in the coming days we will introduce legislation at a national level on this key question of digital taxation. But I really think that this is good news and Pascal and I have decided today to work together to pave the way for a compromise at the OECD level and a common approach at the OECD level on the question of digital taxation. This is a new position and this is I think a good way of solving the issue and moving on. There is also another issue on the tax front, an effective level of minimal taxation for all businesses since tax optimization is not the exclusive property of digital companies. France has made this issue its top priority for its G7 presidency in the economic field and pushed for it within the OECD framework. There will be always tax competition and some tax competition are healthy. But we need to put an end to tax evasion and excessively low tax jurisdictions and we hope we can count on Ireland's support on that very specific and key issue. A stronger currency, a stronger industry, a stronger response to our citizens' expectations including the necessity of having a new international taxation system. These are the essential ingredients for a more positive future for the EU. If we fail, citizens will lose their trust and turn their back on Europe. What we are experiencing with Brexit which is such a tragedy for the UK, for Ireland and for all Europe could be repeated elsewhere and that's exactly what we need to avoid and what we want to avoid. Nothing is written and the best is still possible. This is my deep conviction but we have to act united and we have to act now. Thank you. Thank you very much indeed Bruno, that was very concise, very focused and I think everybody in this room got the message. I'm now going to open the floor for questions. I'd like you to state your name and if you represent an organisation to state what that organisation is first. There are mobile microphones going around so yes, there's a man there beside you. Thank you Mr Chairman, thank you Minister for your clarity in your presentation. I want to focus on the second pillar that you addressed in your presentation, industrial policy for Europe and I particularly welcome your comments in that regard and in particular your characterisation of competition rules in Europe are not being fit for the 21st century and for the environment of global competition that we currently face and that European companies currently face. But I suppose what I want to ask you is you've made these comments a number of times of late. Given that there's a lot of resistance to the perspective that you bring to this topic, how do you in France and the French government propose to advance changes in the competition rules in Europe? Thank you. Another question? Yes. Just wait till the microphone gets to you. Thank you. Antoine Murphy of Trinity College. You've presented the image of Ireland as a type of parody fiscal and this is a common theme that comes from French politicians and indeed the French media when they come over here. It seems to me that if you look at most countries in Europe there are elements of the parody fiscal in all of them. And indeed in France if you look at the top companies in the CAC Carons, the amount of tax optimisation that goes on there is fairly extreme. We could have a look at Total for example, one of the biggest French companies and the effective tax rate that it pays is about 2%. So this notion that we're sort of somewhat unique in tax optimisation I don't think is all that appropriate. If you look at many elements of what's happening in France tax optimisation is going on there in a major way too. Thank you. Final question in this round please. Maybe somebody is back to the hall there. Okay we'll proceed with... No third question? No. Okay we'll answer those first. Trinity College has been happening. No on the first question, the question of competition rules. I strongly believe that this is at the heart of the future of Europe and what we want for Europe. I think that during the last three decades we have focused our energy on the question of the consumers. And the idea was to reduce the prices of the goods produced in Europe for the benefit of the consumers. But we forgot that we also need production, we need a strong industry, we need factories if we want to remain an economic power. And I strongly believe that in a time when you have so many industrial giants emerging either in China or in the US, sticking to the current competition rules would be a huge political and economic mistake. Let's have a look at the decision taken by the Commission on the proposal of merger between Aston and Siemens. The Commission should have said yes to that French-German proposal. Because when you are looking at the industry in that highway sector, there is a new champion called CRRC in China. In less than 15 years they have become more important and stronger than Aston and Siemens together. What do we want to have for trains in Europe tomorrow? Chinese trains or European trains? That's the question. I prefer to have European trains and I think that we should do our best to reinforce our assets, to reinforce our industry by authorising mergers like Aston and Siemens. But to go this way, we have to change the competition rules and we have to allow some important companies to merge for the sake of being more profitable and having new funding for innovation and research. Of course it will be difficult because it is not only a change in the policy, it is a change in mind. We have to put the emphasis on production and not only on consumers, on jobs, on factories, on innovation, on investment. That's the key if we want to remain in the race. We have the support of Germany and there has been really a very important change in the German thinking. I think that the German government is fully aware of the necessity of changing the rules. We have just adopted a common strategy with my German counterpart Peter Altmayer on the competition rules. I think that's good news that France and Germany fully recognise together that there is a need for an urgent change in the competition rules. Now we will have to convince other partners. I hope that Ireland will be on board. We need the support of all the European states but I am deeply convinced that this question of new competition rules and a stronger industry for Europe will be at the heart of the next European elections. On the question of taxation, I never said that Ireland is a kind of a paradifiscal and I would like for me to avoid that kind of caricature of what I just said. I just want to explain the situation. You have internet giants having their place here in Dublin. That's not a problem for me, of course. Everybody is free to choose their location. But these internet giants, and I won't give any specific name. I just want to be very clear, are using the data of 65 million of French consumers. They are taking benefit from those personal data. They are making profits with the 65 million French consumers. And then the profits are not taxed in France but in Ireland. You have the French data and then you have the Irish benefits. I think that everybody can understand that it might be a problem for us because of the rules. And that's why we are so much advocating for a fair and more efficient digital taxation. We are not putting the finger on Ireland or other countries. We are putting the finger on the way data are currently taxed. And we share exactly the same point of view with Pascal. We think that now it's time to think about a fair taxation of digital activities because we cannot rely anymore on the current system. When you have data being produced in one state and the taxation in another state, nobody could accept such a situation. So we need to find a common ground. And that's why we have decided to work very closely with Pascal on that key question to avoid any misunderstanding, to avoid that kind of difficulties we have to define a common solution. This common solution needs to be a permanent one. And that's why I think that the OECD level is the best way of finding a common solution. So we will work together at a technical level to better understand the way Ireland is seeing that problem and the way France is seeing that problem. And I hope that we will be able to find a common ground and a consensus on that key question of a fair and efficient taxation of internet giants and data. But once again, I'm not putting the finger on one single country. I'm putting the finger on the way data are currently taxed because I really believe that we have to change the rules. Thank you. I was going to say that if we hadn't allowed it to happen, Airbus would never have taken off the ground both literally and metaphorically. And you're simply saying that you're looking for the similar kind of recognition on the railway system given that the Chinese railway system has appeared from nowhere in the last 10, 15 years. Right. Right. Question here. Just coming here now. Hi, David Higgins. I'm from Carrick Hill. Italy agreed a deal with Europe last December on its budget deficit despite the fact that it put in very ambitious numbers on privatisations and on VAT safeguard clauses. Now that Italy is in recession, it looks likely that its budget deficit targets will be missed this year and it may find itself on a course towards excessive deficit procedure this year. I want to ask you whether Italy should be punished, whether it should enter that procedure. And yeah, that's my question. Thank you. Okay, that question. We've got a question down there. Could you stand up and tell us your name, please? I'm Frank Wall, a member of the Institute. To take you back to your desire to change the rules and competition, as you're aware, the basic rules and competition law are contained in the treaties. Do you think your reforms can be achieved without changing the treaties, given that the Commission has extensive executive powers as well in relation to those treaty rules? I see, on the other hand, there would take a third question there, please. Thank you. Peter Gunning, a member of the Institute, and thank you very much, Minister. How would you envisage the budget of the Eurozone being financed? And what would be the relationship of that budget to the financial perspectives to the budget of the EU 27? Thank you. It's a big interesting question. On Italy. Italy should not be punished. Italy should be held. And everybody should understand that sticking to the common rules and abiding by the open rules is in their national interest and in the common interest of all EU member states and all the members of the Eurozone. We have to get rid of that idea that you can act alone, as if we were not members of the same currency zone.  I don't care about the European rules. I don't care about the excessive deficit. I want to spend the money I want to spend. This is foolish, because this is a lie. And when you are lying to your population, the backlash can be very violent. We have defined common rules within the Eurozone. Everybody has to stick to those rules. I'm a French finance minister, and usually the French finance ministers are always explaining that, well, we will do our best to stick to the European rules, but if it is not possible to do so, you will understand the French position. I'm explaining exactly the contrary. I believe that when you belong to a common currency zone, we are all on the same boat, and nobody can think that he can improve its own situation without having everybody on board. Nobody can believe that he can put aside the European rules without having negative consequences for its own country. That's exactly the situation in Italy. Some politicians in Italy have explained, well, we will spend a lot of public money. We will rise the level of public expenditures, and it won't have any consequence, but the fact is that Italy is in recession. And that's a problem for all of us, not only for Italy, but for all of us, because when there is a recession in Italy, it has a direct impact on the level of growth in France. If Donald Trump decides to put new tariffs on trade, for instance, on the European car industry, it will have a direct impact not only on Germany, but also on France, on Italy, on Ireland, on all the European countries. We share the same future, and we share exactly the same destiny. That's why I'm so much advocating for gathering our efforts, gathering our fundings, gathering our skills to be able to face the world competition. But I'm also advocating for sticking to the European rules, because when you are weakening the European rules, you are weakening the whole eurozone. On the second question, if there is a need for changing the treaty, I don't have the answer yet to that question. We are looking at the best way of changing the competition rules, but I cannot answer to your question. We are in the process of examining what would be necessary, but if there is a need for a change in the treaty, the key question is not the legal instrument. The key question is the political purpose. And that's clearly the question now. If there is anybody in the room which is in the situation to explain to me what is today the political purpose of Europe, please speak to me and give me the response. Because we should be all concerned by the rise of populism across Europe, but we should all think about the roots of the rise of populism within Europe. And I think that one of the roots that explains the rise of populism across Europe is the lack of political purpose. Europe, what for? What for? Is it for peace? Is it for economic growth? Is it for jobs? Is it to build a political sovereignty and a technological sovereignty? We have to redefine the European project and to explain to our citizens why we are doing so much effort altogether to reinforce Europe. My deep conviction is that we are building Europe for the sake of technological sovereignty, military sovereignty, political sovereignty, financial sovereignty. That is exactly what is at stake now.  And if you are not putting all together all the financial resources of European countries, you won't be able to have your own batteries. Your electric batteries will come from South Korea or from China. You won't have your own technological skills to be autonomous. You will be dependent on the American technology. There is today a direct link between the technological sovereignty and the political one. So that's the key question Europe, what for? The third question on the Eurozone budget, I think that we have to rely on both national resources and we have to take some national resources to fund the Eurozone budget. And also from new resources, for instance the taxation on financial transaction might be one of the resources for the Eurozone budget, which makes very clear that we don't want to take the money from the European financial perspective to fund the Eurozone budget. Let's be very clear on that because I know the concern of some member states about the intention of some members of the Eurozone. Our willingness is not to take the money from the financial perspective to fund the Eurozone budget. We have to rely first of all on new resources, for instance the taxation on financial transaction and also we have to rely on national resources. Thank you very much. I see hand down there at the back of the hall and a second hand and then there's a hand here as well. Thank you very much. Questions in relation to Brexit? Sorry, there's something wrong with the microphone. Two questions in relation to Brexit, if I may. One, what has been the French strategy in trying to attract investment in a post-Brexit world for companies looking for a home after the UK leaves? And how successful has that strategy been? And then secondly, what would be the French position if there was a request for an extension to article 50 over the next number of weeks in terms of timeframe? There are two questions there. There's another question back there, if that's right. Yes, I see it. Minister, thank you very much for the presentation. Sorry that the microphone is not clear. There's some difficulty if you could stand up and tell us your name and then put the question. I'm going to ask a question about artificial intelligence. We've read a report on the French strategy for artificial intelligence. I just wondered, do you think that actually European competitive advantage is not in a standard setting rather than in a huge natural investment in the eye? Because if you look at the situation before where Europe has been quite successful in starting standards that are now being approximated in other countries outside of the EU, there's not going to be a way forward for Europe. Thank you on this question here. Thank you, Minister. Dan O'Brien from the Institute. You mentioned military independence. Could you talk a little bit about how you view the role of the EU and NATO in European defence in future years? Thank you. Three questions, please. So on the question of post Brexit French attractiveness, it's very clear that we want to be more attractive for foreign investment. That's why we have decided with ML Macron to take some decisive steps to improve the attractiveness of the French model and to improve the French competitiveness. We have, for instance, decided a full overhaul of the French taxation system by getting rid of the so-called ESF, the wealth tax, which is now at the heart of the reactions in the streets in France. We have also decided to reduce the level of corporate tax by 33.3% to 25% by 2022. And finally, we decided to introduce a flat tax on capital revenues. So these are the three decisions that we have taken to make France more attractive for the financial companies coming from London. We also have the agency, the European agency that will be located in France. Unfortunately, we were in competition with Dublin on that location, but I clearly think that France might be one of the important financial centres in a few years. And you know the time where we were explaining in France that finance is the enemy, is over, because we need finance if you want to have a strong economy.  You cannot have a strong real economy, strong factories, strong industrial plants, strong innovation, strong technologies without having the necessary funding for that. So that's why we want to be one of the most attractive countries across Europe for financial companies. As far as the extension to article 50 is concerned, I just have to understand what for. Because if there is no clarity on the purpose of that extension, I don't see the necessity of that extension. So it's up to the British government to explain to us if they are asking for an extension to article 50, what kind of extension and what for. But the heart of the French position will remain the agreement negotiated by Michel Barrie. Michel has done a great job. I think that the agreement that we have achieved is a fair one, a very efficient one, a very good one. And when you have a good agreement, I think it's wise to stick to that agreement. And I can tell you that Ireland can rely on the full support of France on that very sensitive issue of Brexit. We are fully aware of the concerns of the Irish population about the possible consequences from both an economic and financial point of view of Brexit. We are fully aware that the British people might ask at one point to have changes in the agreement and that the Irish people are very much concerned about that. So we just want to recall that there is an agreement and everybody has to stick to the agreement that has been already negotiated. I deeply regret the decision that has been taken by the British people. And I would have preferred the UK to stay within the EU. Let's be clear on that. But the decision has been taken. And once the decision has been taken by the British people, you have to obey by the decision taken by the British people. That's it. We have negotiated an agreement. We have taken into account all the consequences and all the risks for the Irish economy. No, let's stick to the agreement that has been negotiated. And we will be very careful about the very concrete consequences that the Brexit might have on the Irish economy and on the Irish people. And you can rely on our full support. On artificial intelligence. I think that the European economy has key competitive advantages. But we need more funding. We need to gather our resources. And we need to invest more in researchers. You know that you have in Shenzhen for the time being more researchers on artificial intelligence than all the researchers all over Europe. So if you want to be successful, first of all you have to make the people aware of the key consequences for our economy and also for our society of the artificial intelligence. And you have to gather our forces. Then you have to define the rules and the way you will use artificial intelligence. And I think where Europe is clearly useful, where we need Europe, is to define common standards and a common view of what a society might be. We don't have the same view of what a society might be as the Chinese or American friends. We think, for instance, that we need to protect personal data. We need to protect the health data, for instance, because these are very sensitive data. But let's define all together the rules in which we will use artificial intelligence and the borders that we will define for that artificial intelligence. I think it is the best way of defining the European model of society. On the military question and the question of sovereignty, Europe has to be aware that history is back. We thought after the fall of the Berlin war that history was at the end. Towards the end of history, liberal democracies had won the race and the battle against communism, and liberal democracies would extend all over the world without any difficulty. Thirty years later, we have to take into account that we were wrong. History is back. History means violence, competition. We value between nations. And Europe cannot imagine that our continent will remain in peace without taking into account that history is back. If you want to be able to protect against terrorism, you need to have strong military forces. Because to win the battle against terrorism, you have of course to have the necessary means at the national level. And you need to fight terrorism within your borders, but you also need to intervene out of your borders abroad. In Africa, for instance, like we are currently doing with the French army and with the support of many European countries. I think that one of the most difficult points for the European citizens is to be aware that there is a strategic threat, that there is violence in the world. And that we can't rely anymore only on the protection and the support of the United States. It is not the case anymore, and it won't be the case anymore in the future. So relying only on the protection of the US army or the military means of Washington would be a key strategic mistake. We have to invest in our armies. We need to be independent also on the military field. And when Emmanuel Macron is proposing, for instance, to have a common European army, and when Angela Merkel is explaining well, that's an interesting idea. Let's work on that. I think that we are moving in the right direction. Because we need to be able to face any threat with the support of NATO, but maybe in some case without the support of NATO. Thank you very much. Are there any further questions in the hall? Thank you very much Minister. Europe's responsibility is towards Africa with its booming population and threat of really large... ...suit has to change and the policy has to develop, or can we simply rely on a common defence in the army strategy? I see a question on the side of the fireplace. I think we are to your door. Thank you Minister for the chance to talk. I have one question that's more domestic for you, and I put it here towards France for us all. I'm bringing the pain. I believe it's only going to get stronger. And I know you've talked about it, Julie-John, and the discretaught. How are we in our comfortable new-class, real-file, comfortable world, able to reach out to those and include them in our vision? Because they're developing their knowledge. How can we, or should we, move against the mentality of those that are in the past? Thank you, and there's a question here in the front. Hi Minister, my name is Christopher. I'm from the Norwegian Embassy. I want to touch on a point you alluded to earlier concerning protecting intellectual property. Just asking the question, how can we challenge, for example, countries like China, who allegedly take a lot of our ideas, how can we protect those the best way? And how will you influence the attitude of other European countries who are a bit more friendlier towards China, for example? Thank you. Thank you. On the very last question on intellectual property, I think that there is a broader question behind your question, which is the best way of engaging China into the rules which should be our common rules for fair trade. I mean intellectual property, but also access to public procurement and the question of public aid. So we are working very closely with China on that. We are discussing on that. I think that opposing China is not the right solution. Engaging China is the right one, and you have to choose between those two options. Either you want to face China in a very confrontational manner, and I think that you will lose. Or you try to engage China to explain our difficulties and to try to fix the issues that we might have with China. And I think that this cooperative way is the best way to obtain some very concrete results. I would say also that we should not rely only on the fact that China will change. We also need to change ourselves. Let's take the example of state aid. We have been refusing any kind of state aid to our private companies for many years, explaining that it was against European rules. What has been the conclusion and the outcome of that, the loss of some key private companies. In some strategic fields like the renewable energies. So we have to take into account that in the 21st century, if you want to be able to develop some technologies, some key technologies, some disruptive technologies, which won't be profitable from the very one day, you need the support of the public funding. Having for instance Germany explaining well, that's true. I'm ready to invest in private SMEs. That's a total game changer and that's good news. That's exactly what we have been advocating in France for many years. I'm not explaining that the public state should invest in all the French SMEs. I'm just explaining that when you have a new technology, which is not profitable from the very beginning, if there is a need for public support, we should not refuse that public support. For electric batteries, for cars for instance, to come back to that example. If we want to be successful, we need the support of public funding. Because there won't be any private company which will invest 20 billion euros in five years for electric batteries. No one. So either we want to be successful and we need the support of public funding from France, Germany, Poland, tomorrow Spain. And I hope that one day Allen will join and then we will be successful or we won't be able to develop those new technologies. I'm coming back to your question. We have to engage China, but we also have to take into account the consequences of what China has already decided. And we have also in Europe to change our own rules to face the challenges of the 21st century, not the challenges of the former century. On the question of Africa, then I will take the last question, mine Le Pen, which is of course a critical one. I was in Egypt, I think it was in January, so I have been three days in Egypt. I met President Sisi and he told me, well, you know we are 100 millions of Egyptians now. In less than 20 years, we will be 140 millions. Now you have the choice. Either you help us developing our country from an economic and social point of view, or you will have the 40 million Egyptians in Europe. That's so simple like that. So I strongly believe that the question of public development and support to the African economies is one of the key ones for the 21st century. If we want to avoid huge migrations coming from Africa because of the poverty, because of the climate change, because of the military conflicts in some African countries, we have to help Africa and we need to help Africa. I know from the point of view of the finance minister, that's always very difficult to explain to the French population that I will spend one single euro for the public aid in Africa. That's always very difficult to explain and to support that kind of idea, but that's necessary. Because the whole of a politician is not to think about tomorrow. It's to think about the next century and to see exactly what is at stake. Migration, climate change, technological revolutions and the rise of a strong Europe. These are the key challenges for us. And when I'm taking the decision, I'm always thinking about the consequences for the next 25 years, for the next generation. I'm just asking whether my decision will help to build a stronger Europe, will help to fight against climate change, will help us to have our sovereignty in disruptive technologies. If the answer is yes, I move on. If the answer is no, I move back. That's our responsibility. To think about the challenges for the next generation and not to think only about tomorrow and the next polls. I don't want to make any comment here in Ireland about Maine Le Pen herself. I just want to be very specific on what is happening now in Europe and in all developed countries. The key question is that we run the risk of having a permanent division among two parts of the nations. On the one side, those who are benefiting from the globalization, the well paid, which have a very good job, good earnings, good incomes, and those who have the impression of being left behind or being left out of the globalization. And what strikes me, I've been in politics for more than 15 years, is that for the first time in the developed countries you have a very clear opposition between two parts of the countries. You no longer have many parties, many political forces. You have on the one side those who are for and on the other side those who are against. You have the remainers and you have the Brexiters. You have those for Emmanuel Macron and those for Maine Le Pen. That's a danger for all democracies. And what is at stake now is not only the future of Europe, it's the future of democracies. That's one of the key questions that we have to think about. And my conviction is that we have to avoid that opposition between the in and the out, the remainers and the Brexiters, those voting for the extremist parties and those voting for the reasonable parties. We have to take into account the difficulties and the requirements and the claims and the sufferings of those who have the impression to be left to be left out. That's our key responsibility. And I think that in the movements of the Gilets jaunes, the yellow jackets, there is one positive point. We have to listen to those who are in the streets explaining we have a job and we are not leaving from our job. We need better incomes, we need less taxation. We have to listen to that very carefully and we have to give a very clear, concrete and quick response to those people. Because what we are living now in France will happen or might happen in every European countries. In a different matter, of course, it will be the Brexit in the UK. It will be the rise of the alternative for Germany in Germany. It will be the current coalition in Italy. It will be the rise of regional tensions in Spain. But that's exactly the same political difficulty and the same political challenge. We have a common destiny and the nation is strong when everybody has the clear understanding and the clear impression that he's part of that common destiny. Thank you. Minister, I think the applause that you've just heard speaks volumes for the respect and the admiration and the appreciation that you've given to this audience here this evening. It's a long time since we've had a French Minister for Finance in this room, but you certainly are in the first division of such ministers and you deserve the recognition that you have received. Can I, on behalf of the Institute and on behalf of all your colleagues here as well, say how much we appreciate at the time that you've given? I know you have a very early start in the morning and we are all the more grateful for your time, for your passion, but also for your insights and your honesty in relation to the differences that unite us, which is the best way to go forward. So, on behalf of the Institute and all our Irish colleagues and members here, bon voyage. Thank you.


The Jack Benny program presented by Lucky Strike... Sturks-Stur, blablabla, blablabla, blablabla... ...Luckies are milder... And science provides the proof! Yes, scientific tests prove LuckyStrike is milder than any other principal brand of cigarettes. Tests after tests produced conclusive evidence of LuckyStrike's greater mildness. But that's not all. These scientific tests are confirmed by independent consulting laboratories and they prove lucky strike mildest of six major brands tested There's no doubt when you light up a lucky you get a smoother smoking milder tasting cigarette and you enjoy the rich taste of fine tobacco because LS MFT LS MFT Lucky strike means fine tobacco fine light naturally mild tobacco that gives you more real deep down smoking enjoyment so for the rich taste of fine tobacco for smoothness and mildness with never a rough puff light up a lucky yes prove to yourself what scientific tests prove lucky strike is milder than any other principal brand of cigarettes make your next carton lucky strike so round so firm so fully packed so free and easy on the draw the lucky strike program starring Jack Benny with Mary Livingston Phil Harris Rochester Dennis Dean yours truly Don Wilson Ladies and gentlemen it isn't often that our star goes out on a personal appearance tour but having decided to go a lot of preparations have to be made at the moment Jack is in conference with Steve Bradley his publicity man yes if any this is the greatest idea ever had you just listen to me and we'll pack every theater from the sun kishaws of California to the rock found coasts of Maine but Steve what an idea hand me that phone I'll order the posters right now we'll have billboards all over the country but Steve look Steve look I've never been billed that way before Jack Benny the platinum ball of fire I mean it's ridiculous I've never worked with fans or balloons I'm way ahead of you Benny now instead of fans or balloons you'll come out in a blue spot and do your stuff with two violins why at the end of the dance the violins open and pigeons fly out pigeons certainly we got to do something to take their attention away for those skinny legs of yours now look Steve I'm not going to go for any of your crazy excuse me there's someone at the door what a silly idea Jack Benny the platinum ball of fire hello Jack oh hello Mary come on in where's Rochester that's what I'd like to know last night he asked me if he could have the evening off I haven't seen him since well Jack maybe Steve Steve Bradley Mary Mary Livingston long time no see Mary Mary you know Steve Bradley well certainly he was my publicity man when I worked at the May Company no yes sir I gave this little girl one of the most extensive publicity campaigns in my career in two short weeks I raised her from the bargain basement to the stock and counter on the fifth floor well and this mind you're during the heat of a presidential campaign all right calm down I don't doubt that you're a great publicity man but you'll have to think of another stunt for me I'm not going to go for those pigeons what's that supposed to be I don't know Steve's got some ideas about my personal appearance he wants me to work with pigeons well I think that's a great idea what are you laughing at I could just see the finale a pigeon swoops down takes off your toupee and lays an egg in it Mary this is going to be a high-class show just wait till you see it you know we open Wednesday night in Pasadena by the way Steve how are they doing at the box office great great I had 50,000 tickets printed up I'm going to need another 50,000 50,000 how do you expect to sell all those tickets easy on the face of the ticket instead of printing Jack Benny I put Rose Bowl games what they're going like hotcakes Steve we're not going to do our show at the Rose Bowl we'll be at the Pasadena Civic Auditorium and I better book something in the Rose Bowl it'll be jammed now look Steve are you working for me or Mary would you get that please okay hello well lucky me every time I get a wrong number it's a dame Phil it's me Mary okay okay you're not a bad number either live well thanks Jack is busy right now he'll call you back well look Libby I'm not at home I'm at the photographer Steve Bradley called me this morning told me I had an idea it was going to talk over with Jackson but in the meantime I should rush down and have publicity pictures taken so tell Jackson to hurry I can catch cold standing here like this what these pigeons ain't keeping me warm okay I'll tell them Jack Phil wants to talk to you alright have me the phone here if a pigeon answer hangs up instead of Pasadena we should be playing in Czechoslovakia hello Phil what hello Phil Mumble's Livingston's getting hard to follow ain't you hey Jackson I want to talk to you about the band arrangement on that personal appearance tour you got a minute sure what is it well look how do you want my orchestra to dress in blue suits or sport clothes neither Phil I want them to wear evening clothes look Jackson the only evening clothes they got are pajamas what and they can't wear those half the draw strings are missing look Phil let them wear whatever they want but look at but half Sammy now look half Sammy the drummer in a blue suit because he'll be sitting up high okay and Phil when I'm out on the stage telling jokes I want your boys to act as though they're enjoying it it looks good to the audience alright took care of that Jackson I even thought of the people in the balcony so I painted a smile on the top of Sammy's head oh wonderful another thing dad we're gonna have a little problem with Remly a problem yeah but everything will be alright if we let him sit behind the piano but Phil I want to look like we got a big orchestra why shouldn't Franky sit out in the open because every time a spotlight shines in his face he jumps up and yells I didn't do it I didn't do it no the only way we can calm him down is to beat him with a rubber hose well I'm busy arranged the orchestra the best way you can so long so long Clyde don't forget to bring the hose that Phil is the craziest guy if I use on the phone I got a sensational idea huh oh Nellie now listen when you get to Milwaukee it'll be the start of fire prevention week yes yes yes so for a publicity stunt we'll have you jump from the top of a 12-story building into a net it's never been done before what do you mean it's never been done before many people have done stunts like that jumping off a building into a net a hair net what maybe the publicity why are the paper will be full of it not only the story but the pictures I can see the flowers now now cut that out I want my publicity simple and dignified so now who can that be come in oh hello Jack hello Barry hello Don come on in fellas hello boys hmm hello boys hello Barry they talked Don Don they talked it's the first time I ever heard them talk Mary Mary they talked hello fellas hmm so good to last now Don I know you brought the boys over to try out the commercial but I'm busy right now Steve Bradley my publicity man is laying out my personal appearance to her you know I opened in Pasadena Wednesday night Wednesday night oh darn it I wish I could go then why can't you I bought two tickets to the Rose Bowl game Don you'll still see my show I'll explain it to you later now take the boys home oh but Jack this will only take just a minute now the reason I want you to hear the commercial is because for the past few weeks they've been singing popular songs and this time they have something classical something that even Toscanini would be proud of Toscanini alright Don Steve this will only take a minute we can talk later Don what's the title of this thing the boys are gonna do don't kill his dance of the hours from Lajaconda when this we've got to hear take it boys tiffic tass are smoother than all milder by test gee this is beautiful Mary give me your hand that never is wrong but you take a puff take a puff cause you'll never ever find a puff that's rough never take a puff that's rough never take a puff that's rough take a puff cause you'll never get enough made up of smoker lucky when are they true life of the lucky don't be late start today cause we know you're gonna say you like a mess lucky strike is much the best take a like a mackerel bag make a test you'll agree they are the best for lucky strike means fights a lot Don take them home five and five and miles of mackerel la la la la la la la la really a great number well thanks Jack well we gotta be running along now so long Mary so long Don bye fellas goodbye Mary so long fellas now where where were we Steve is there any other idea you've got for publicity just one what is it when we arrive in Kansas City I want you to walk down the street playing your violin and lead a thousand cows into the slaughterhouse into the slaughterhouse how do you know they'll follow me follow you they'll be pushing you oh wait a minute oh Jack what when you go out to buy a wardrobe for your stage show I'd like to go with you wardrobe well certainly aren't you gonna buy some new suits Mary I just bought a new suit in fact you were with me Jack that was in 1936 time flies I haven't even started to wear the second pair of pants but maybe you're right Mary this suit I'm wearing now is old enough to send to Fred Allen hey wait a minute Benny wait a minute you're gonna send that old suit to Fred Allen yes why that's a great human interest story Benny it'll be the biggest thing since that panhandler asked you for a dime and you gave him 50 cents Steve don't mention that in this house it's costing me a fortune in dishes now look Steve oh heaven come in hello Dennis hello Mr. Benny look out for these firecrackers Dennis what are you doing I'm celebrating the 4th of July 4th of July this is only the 7th of May it is well certainly boy the state light saving time sure has me mixed up look kid don't blame it on daylight saving time you're always mixed up what'd you come over for anyway oh I come over to warn you about a new quiz program it's a fake a new quiz program uh-huh I answered every question right and they didn't even give me a refrigerator a bendix or anything what station is it on oh it isn't on the radio these people ring your doorbell come right into your house and ask your questions Dennis that was the census taker census taker sir every ten years the government goes all over the country counting noses why don't they just count people what suppose somebody does have two noses it won't throw them off much counting noses is just an expression oh hello Mary I didn't see you I know I was hiding I don't blame you neither do I who's he this is Steve Bradley my publicity man oh yeah you know my father does that kind of work for universal studios he does I didn't know that sure right now he's publicizing a picture called Coca-Cola for Mark Anthony what it's a sequel to champagne for Caesar oh yeah it's a cycle now they're working on a new one called Strongheart for Lassie now Dennis I gotta go and buy some new clothes now let's hear your song you're gonna do on the program okay and when you finish I want you wait a minute kid hold it well what's the matter I just heard the back door open and close it must be Rochester sneaking in oh Rochester yeah is that you sneaking in the back door it ain't Georgie Jack Rochester come in here I want to talk to you yes now Rochester last night you asked me if you could have the evening off didn't you uh-huh now that was last night now it's eleven o'clock the next morning uh-huh now where have you been well boys we're going away soon and some friends of mine on Central Avenue gave me a farewell party now wait a minute Rochester every night this week you've been to a farewell party it's the same one we just adjourned during the daytime what when the gold of the day meets the blue of the night I go where the wild goose goes well look Rochester I haven't got time to talk to you now I gotta listen to Dennis sing your song let's have it kid just a minute Dennis give me that firecracker okay here you are now go ahead with ow silly go ahead and sing very good Dennis so now that you've used your beautiful voice to win yourself back into my favor would you do something for me oh sure mr. many what is it go home yes sir see a man about those pigeons look Steve you can forget it I'm not going to do a strip tease act with a bunch of pigeons okay okay I'll be at the office if you want me Jack if you want me to go downtown with you to pick out a suit we better go now okay Mary oh Rochester where's the car in the garage well come on we want you to drive us downtown yes sir Jack why don't you keep your garage cleaner I'll straighten it up someday come on get in the car go ahead start the car Rochester yes sir but first I gotta get a little water oh is the radiator dry no I'm taking an aspirin I know what's coming never mind that just start the car yes sir it works every time try it again Rochester yes sir say Jack there's something wrong here why is the car leaning way over to the left I don't know Rochester why are we leaning over to the left remember last week when you sent the car to the garage to have the wheels aligned yes well only three came home starring Claudette Colbert stop being silly how can a car run with a missing wheel I stepped a roller skate under the axle slow down when you cross the car tracks well here we are Mary there's the store across the street Rochester there's a parking space where between that truck and the convertible but I can't get into that space it's too small well put our bumper up against the truck and push it oh boys come now well Miss Livingston and I'll get out here and you find a parking space yes sir here's the store Mary let's go in well let's see where is the hiya bud what's new huh oh hello hello come on Mary let's get out who is that that's that racetrack cow I'm always running in now let's see I wonder oh good afternoon may I help you sir yes yes I'd like to buy a new suit I don't blame you what I'm Mr. Kerns and I'll be glad to show you our new spring line good but first tell me what is the price range here oh our suits start at $25 and go up to $150 well I I wouldn't want to wear anything as cheap as $25 and yet I wouldn't want to go way up to $150 I understand I'd like something in the middle say about $30 oh Jack why don't you get a good suit for a change after all you're going to wear it on the stage every night stage are you an actor well yes yes yes I am my name is Manasha Skolny I mean Jack I just happen to be thinking of him I was reading I'm Jack Benny now Mr. Kerns what color suit would you suggest that I get well now a lot of men select a color to match their hair or their eyes let's see your eyes are blue aren't they bluer than the lips of a schoolboy at 40 below oh Jack what is it Mary here's a very pretty suit it's gabardine oh good good I like gabardine well I'm sure that suit would look very nice on you Mr. Benny yes but it's $45 well there's a whistle in the pocket well I don't care so much about that but I think I'll take a suit oh fine fine I'll go upstairs and get our tailor so he can measure you for any alteration thank you Say Mary I'm gonna walk to the back of the store see if there's anything else I'd like want to join me I'm tired I'll just wait right here okay da da da da da da da da da da da da grease paint da da da da da da da count the house yup and gabardine suit looked nice Forty-five dollars though. Oh well There's no Hey bud But huh Come here a minute Oh me. Yeah What are you doing? I'm uh, I'm buying a suit. What kind? Gabbardine, uh-uh What? Get a wool suit Why why should I get wool? I'm a kind of pants. They're great in the back stretch But I I like Gabbardine look I'm telling you for your own good get wool But don't take my weight for it. Look at the breeding The breeding it's out of Mary's little lamb by Bob Bob black sheep Well, look, I'm gonna buy a Gabbardine suit and that settles it. Okay.  Benny. Yes.  Mr. Benny. This is mr. Nelson. How do you do? How do you do now? I don't want to seem impatient, but But I'm in a hurry. Can we get on with the measuring? Why certainly mr. Nelson. Do you have your tape measure with you? Yeah, now hold still little man little man. You're buying the one with the whistle in the pocket, aren't you? Mr. Nelson just take the measurement very well a collar 60 collar 60 shoulders 18 Shoulders It says it says Never mind that a right sleeve 34 right sleeve 34 a left sleeve 21 Left sleeve 21. You want people to see your wristwatch, don't you? Don't stop wasting my time. Oh by the way, mr. Benny, would you like wider narrow cuffs on your trousers? Why what's the difference? Well, there really isn't much difference, but most people prefer the wide cuffs. Why? Well, haven't you had it happen that you accidentally drop a coin and it falls into the cuff of your pants? No He always catches it before it hits the ground Yes, now mr. Nelson, when will my suit be ready in two weeks two weeks But I wanted it for my personal appearance. I'm sorry, but it'll take two weeks You mean I can't have my brand new suit for my opening in pasadena No, but if you like we'll run an ad in the paper telling them you bought one Life had enough of this. I'm not going to buy the suit at all But jack if you don't have a suit to wear what you can do about your personal appearance in pasadena I'll show you. Let me use that phone Hello, steve buy some corn. We're going to use those pigeons after all Come on In a cigarette mildness and enjoyment go together so light up a lucky because Lucky strike is milder. Yes scientific tests prove lucky strike is milder than any other principal brand of cigarettes These scientific tests are confirmed by independent consulting laboratories And they prove lucky strike mildest of six major brands tested and no wonder it takes fine tobacco to make a fine cigarette And ls mft ls mft lucky strike means fine tobacco fine light naturally mild tobacco So for a milder tasting cigarette with never a rough puff smoke a lucky You'll enjoy the smooth rich taste of lucky's fine tobacco You'll prove to yourself what scientific tests prove Lucky strike is milder than any other principal brand of cigarettes. Try a carton of lucky strike I'm glad I didn't buy that suit from those smart alec guys in that store. Oh jack forget it Gee, I wonder where Rochester parked the car. I guess we'll have to walk clear around the block to find it No, we won't marry. Wait a minute. I got something here that'll bring Rochester right to us Jack you didn't take right out of the pocket Those guys aren't going to push me around Be sure to hear Dennis Day in a day in the life of Dennis Day Thank you to the ms man who shall always follow us immediately. This is cbs the columbia bop casting system


Well, it still continues as the trend of that there's only one good Saw movie, really. Yeah. Yay. Wholeheartedly agree. Ooh, that's a hot mug, guys. Hey guys, this is our review for Saw 2. Yeah, Saw 2. Continuing the trend of our... We're hoping that maybe we can get through to all of them before the new one comes out on Halloween. Nay, nay, oh dear God, 1,000 times nay. And, uh, yeah, I don't like this one. I honestly, this is the only one other than the first one. I've seen more than once, and it's been years since I've seen it. And I feel like I enjoyed it more this time than I remember, but it's still not a good movie. Um, the whole concept of kind of taking what you said was a script that was written by the director. Yeah, it's... Bozeman wrote this for, uh, to be another movie entirely, and after Saw did really well, um, they brought in Lee Winnell to make it a Saw movie. So essentially a Cloverfield. Yeah, it's... It's got some ideas that I think are kind of cool, like these guys being trapped in a house, having to figure out the clues all the while Donny's trying to figure out where his son is, because Jicks sells in the room with him.  Yeah, it's, I mean, it is Bozeman's first film. Um, I mean, granted, he does two more of these dumpster fires, so... I'll say, like, maybe someone's there, but I do like aspects of this movie, there's... I mean, the escape room thing is kind of cool, I like that that's the way it kind of plays out. Um, I like that it ends up not being, like, really Jigsaw's puzzle, so, like, justifies its difference early on, although I'm still not a huge fan of that whole plot twist. And then, like, it feels like it couldn't even be bothered for just one plot twist, it does several. And then, it feels like this movie is very much overreaching. It's trying to have too many things at the same time, rather than actually just having a concise movie, because you have editing that would definitely put seizures into anyone suffering from epilepsy.  They took a lot of the aspects that worked in the first film, and they're like, hey, why don't we just shove that full of ADHD and adrenaline? The first movie did that, too, but this movie definitely does more of it, and, like... It's excessive. Somehow it's far too excessive. Yeah, somehow it's... it's a problem in this one. No real central character that you root for in this movie. Yeah. Like, you can maybe say The Sun, and you can say Amanda. But he's kind of a... The Sun's kind of a wet blank at the whole movie. Yeah, like... He doesn't do much, like... No, no, everyone's cardboard in this movie. Yeah. And except for one particular character who's... He's just an infuriating cardboard being the drug dealer character. I remember absolutely detesting this guy when I saw it the first time.   This guy is just a... There's nothing about his character that's enjoyable. Like, obviously you've got to have an antagonist in sort of situations like this, but he's literally just a brick wall. I'm getting out of here. A brick wall that is aggressive and... And pulls off something you've been really impossible at the end of the movie. Like, guys... I was gonna bring... I was like... I was trying to figure out when to bring that part up, because I think the thing that bugs me most with that is it's like the moment. Like, we start getting the... Like, we talked about it in our first review. The... The da-da-dim, da-da-dim, da-da-dim. Like, it starts rolling the big thing, but that's him cutting his number off the back of his neck, which doesn't matter at all. Which...  Hey, hey, look, there's... There's a number on the back of your neck. It's very, very obvious to see. Everyone here could have like, you know, had of like maybe some sort of distinguisher to tell, because like, hoodie's hairy. Hoodie, hairy, I think. But he's...   Also, how did he cut it off? The best part of that movie would have been he messed it up. Which I thought they could have ended up doing, because everybody else fucks up everything else they do in this movie.  And that's the other thing too, there isn't a consistency with the traps.  You are dead if you make the slightest mistake, while some of them are like, yeah, they're not great. Like obviously the one that I'm talking about is the needle pit. Best scene of the movie. Best scene, everyone gets the shivers from that. I stood up and I was like... It's hard to watch that scene. But there's nothing negative about it. None of the syringes have poison or anything in them. There's no negative. That was just pain.  There's a few... What's it the one that's just randomly in the box?  Have her enter this room that no one else checked. A lot of the elements of this movie are just really dumb.   A literal war crime. That's the... It seems a little fun. Like that's one of those... And it kind of gets just like tossed aside. Like of course he'd have this. Also, how do you get this house? How do you get this house built? I get multiple houses.  Yeah, multiple houses.  Yeah, apparently. Yeah, it's just like the further... The cult of Jigsaw. We haven't even got to the Hoffman era yet. It's a very messy movie. It was ambitious in a way. I'll give it that. But I feel that it reaches way too far with too many things. Too many conveniences. I feel that the... What's it? You say like the director having this being his first time experience as well as like obviously not having someone as experienced as James Wan was. Even then, James Wan was... I mean, he's a year out of his first film at this point. But he's just a much more concise idea. And then the melding of the two scripts just doesn't work. Some parts are okay, other parts not at all. And I feel like that ended up... I mean, it also kind of heralds... I mean, it sucks because it actually maybe fits in more than we're giving it credit for. Because I think it heralds a lot of the nonsense that comes later in this franchise with the like... The too many twists and the like... The like deliberately confusing timelines for things and like the geography is all over the place. Which I commented while we were watching it. I kind of like some of the editing where the geography... Some of it's not bad. Where like it pans off somebody walking as if they're panning to the people next to them but they're in a different room. I thought that was cool but... And deliberately confusing on the geography. And the ending can definitely be kind of commendable because it has to have like that element of like... Oh, they're in the house at the same time. It does give you this multiple feeling of false sense of hope, I guess. And that part is good. I feel like the ending is the most decent part of the whole movie aside from the needle scene. The needle pit and the ending... But even then like the editing is just... It's like it's way, way, way, way too much. I mean it does have a mud vein side of the credit. So, you know, New Metal lives strong in this movie. Yes. So I definitely can see that maybe they took... They have some of those own criticisms themselves. Because the third movie is... Literally the most concise thing. It is very... I'm looking forward to watching the third one because I honestly, the... I know three, like three is the end of Jigsaw. That's like the only thing I remember. It's the doctor. It's the doctors Amanda and him in the medical room. I don't remember anything else about the movie. And all the other movies are like weird amalgamations of like I have no idea which came where and whatnot. So I'm looking forward to watching the rest of the series even though I have absolutely no faith I'm gonna like any of them. No, probably not. For some reason I still feel that Six was good but I think that's because it was taking apart the American medical assistant. I do vaguely remember liking... I actually think I have like weirdly fond memories of four. I don't know why. Like when I think of the Saw series like four sticks out of my head. Johnny Wahlberg, which by the way he was in this movie too. Yeah. Don't worry though, they'll forget that he was in it too. So in the end though, what's your rating for this? I'm gonna go with a three. Honestly, like I did enjoy it more than I... It's not good but I did enjoy like bits and pieces. The needle seems fun. I like the ending. And I think that when I get down to the ones of the later series like the straight up like negative 48 that I'll give Jigsaw. I think I need to give this one a three like relatively speaking but I've part of me enjoyed this. I could see... It's not good. I could see the one to give it a three but I just can't. It's just so irritating to watch. The editing is awful. The only good part about it is the twist at the end. Not even the twist at the end. We did talk about the puns though. Jigsaw dropped on some mighty fine puns. Oh, the safe. It might even get a bump up to that three. What a safe and secure place. Because he's in a safe and secure place while he's like sitting next to the safe. Yeah.  He's close at hand and things. Yeah.  But yo, that whole interrogation scene. Jigsaw making dad jokes. He's just being like cryptic. It's like I would want to punch him too. It's like... I mean that's all he wants him to do. He's being cryptic. Yeah. And then also Donnie Wahlberg's entire thing is... Now there is like just what? Just wait for two hours? Like that's... Yeah. That was the goal. But how he... Like how does that correlate into... Anyways, but my rating for this is a two out of seven. It has some okay elements but it's essentially a very, very crappy version of the first movie expanded. Yeah. Yeah. It's not as... I mean I gave the first one a five and... Yeah. You know maybe a two and a half honestly. Yeah. It's not good but I did like it more than I remembered liking it. So... I remembered exactly all of the parts that I didn't like about this one. All right, well guys that's our review for this one and now we're about to watch number three. We're trying to blast through these. Blast through a couple of these. So uh... And we'll be serious this time. Unlike every other time we've said that we're going to do it fast. So I hope you guys enjoyed the video. If you did leave a like and if you're interested in more subscribe and wait till we do number three which will be hopefully very soon depending on my editing. All right, see you guys.


to start hating on Drake just for attention. I let that charge. You did it when there was no attention. When there was no attention. Damn, you did it when it just hurt you.    I'm not a contrarian though. I'm just, it's really, maybe I am, but I don't mean to be.  Quite the contrary. Quite the contrary.


The many and varied programs at the Department of Interior share some common components. One of these is the varying degree of risk which is present during the accomplishments of all tasks.  However, used incorrectly or without the proper safety constraints, the results can be devastating. Risk assessment, the identification and evaluation of hazards and dangers must be a mandatory element of our decision-making process. Assessment of the risk associated with special use flying missions will often involve the conflict between efficiency, effectiveness and safety. It is imperative that each of you evaluate all hazards associated with proposed flights and that your decisions, commonly referred to as go-no-go decisions, be made knowledgably utilizing all available informed expertise. We oftentimes get so involved in our own little worlds that we overlook or disregard the knowledge and expertise available from outside sources. Uses for airplanes and helicopters that are new or untested in your organization may be common practice in other agencies. Let's take advantage of this learning curve and not reinvent the wheel needlessly. There are no magic formulas that produce steadfast answers in the analysis of risk. Instead, the process is very subjective and directly related to the specific task. The areas of risk that are associated with a special use flying conducted by the Department of Interior can be broken down into five major groupings. These include the pilot, aircraft, support, environment and time. Let's look at each of these elements individually to better understand what type of information we should gather to make our assessment. The pilot. Obviously, a very instrumental element of any flight is the pilot. We first must make sure that he or she is approved and carted for the special use operation that we are considering. Where did the pilot gain their experience in flying this type of mission? When was the last time they flew this type of special use? These are the type of questions that will assist you in your assessment and will establish a very important information sharing and communication link between the pilot and government personnel. Supplying the pilot with written standards that cover the particular objectives and goals for the program that the flying supports is another critical part of the preparation process. Anything that you can do to build a strong bond and promote a team concept between pilot and observer will assist you in the management of risk. The aircraft. What is a proper aircraft to accomplish your task? Fixed wing? A helicopter. And how should it be configured? Wheels? Skis? Floats? Single or twin engine? And what special equipment will be required, such as a cargo hook, a water bucket, or possibly a camera mount or tracking antenna? The answer to all of these type of questions will have an impact on the operation and in turn on the components of risk. Again, it must be emphasized that we must utilize all available expertise and guidance as we answer these questions and make our go-no-go decisions. Support. The aircraft that we choose for our special use flight will generally require some kind of support. This support might be provided by the vendor or by the government depending on ownership. Procurement method. Location of the project, et cetera. Probably the most common support service is fueling. Other examples of support would be fuel maintenance, ground power units, parking and tie-down. Our primary concern here is to assure that any persons involved with providing the support are qualified and that materials and equipment used are proper for the specific aircraft. If regulation or guidelines are published for that specific support function, follow them. Make sure that you consider and plan for all of the support functions that will be associated with your project when assessing total risk. The timely availability of those support functions will be most important to remaining on schedule. Environment. An important element of any mission planning and subsequent risk assessment is the analysis of the environment where the flying is to take place. This may seem like an insignificant item of concern to those with limited aviation knowledge. However, failure to give this factor adequate attention has been a contributing component in several of the department's accidents. Extreme heater cold has a very detrimental effect on the aircraft as well as its performance. Terrain and vegetation must be evaluated. Is the flight in mountainous terrain? Is there the possibility of inclement weather such as rain or snow or possibly icing conditions? It is important that you make sure you identify all of the environmental factors that may present a hazard to the flight and give them knowledgeable consideration as part of the risk assessment. Time. Just how urgent is the mission? Other than life-saving situations, there are very few of any programs that justify execution without proper and complete planning. Oftentimes, the pressure of getting the job done clouds our common sense and prompts us into situations that greatly compromise safety. It's getting dark. Let's hurry and get one more flight in. I have to have the aerial photos by tomorrow for court. The birds are migrating, and if we don't count them today, our database will be destroyed. And a thousand other reasons why the flight must proceed without taking the time to evaluate the risks and properly prepare. It is essential that you start your planning process soon enough to allow for a complete analysis, including time for any unforeseen delays. Any one or combination of the five major elements that we have discussed can increase the risk until it becomes unacceptable and the mission is canceled. Again, it must be emphasized that the person or group that makes these decisions be trained and have an in-depth knowledge and understanding of the subject. A risk assessment should always include an analysis of alternative ways of accomplishing the task. These options might range from using the same aircraft but different flight maneuvers to a totally different motor transportation. Take the time to communicate with others to learn about new or modified ways of utilizing aviation resources in the accomplishment of program requirements. Open a frequent communication with your national, regional, state and local aviation managers along with the Office of Aircraft Services staff can greatly assist you in the analysis, planning and execution of your flights. These sources of aviation expertise also can be most valuable in your appraisal of options. No assessment of risk can be complete without a judgment of the liability that will be incurred as a result of your decision and subsequent actions. Obviously, we could do nothing and substantially limit our liability but this is an unreasonable approach. Instead, the goal should be rational, well-thought-out plans based on knowledgeable decisions supported by trained, experienced and competent personnel. Also, we must have written standards and approved procedures and ensure that the necessary safety equipment and clothing are available and utilized. Good old common sense will serve us well if we pay attention. The rules and regulations are there for a reason. Follow them. If they present a major problem or could better serve the intended purpose if modified, don't ignore them. These are the proper channels to affect change. Each of you can be a key element in this process. Risk assessment is an important factor in the analysis and planning process. This subjective examination of physical hazards and operational procedures is a key element in the accident prevention effort. As we have discussed, there is no rigid formula that will ensure the correctness of your go-no-go decisions. Instead, the analysis must be a systematic and informed evaluation of facts and conditions that pertain to that specific situation. Determine where the specific special use aviation activity that you are considering ranks in the hierarchy of flight activities from using caution to demanding, to extremely demanding and hazardous. It is important that you understand just where your flight activity falls on this scale and that you exercise appropriate discretion. Make sure that you utilize a wealth of information that is available in the department as you work towards your decision. And in closing, let me leave you with these final thoughts. If you should choose undertake the special use flight, make sure that only those individuals that are absolutely necessary for mission accomplishments are on board the aircraft and that each one understands their responsibility. Viewing the special use video that covers your particular activity can greatly assist you and should be a mandatory requirement to be involved operationally with the flight. Also, although the pilot in command is the final authority, all participants are responsible for enhancing the safety of the flight. Aviation safety and aircraft accident prevention in the Department of Interior is based upon the conceptual philosophy that all aircraft accidents can be prevented. Risk assessment is fundamental to this prevention effort. Thank you for your attention and have a safe and successful flight.


Can you characterize everything that the Fed has done this past week as essentially flooding the system with money? Yes, exactly. And there's no end to your ability to do that? There's no end to our ability to do that.