← LSE: Public lectures and events
LSE: Public lectures and events
Towards the French Presidency of the EU: a lecture by Jean-Pierre Jouyet
00:57:55
Loading summary
Transcript120 lines
- [00:00]
A
Well, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the latest in our series of European Institute lectures on the future of Europe. And we are delighted this afternoon to welcome Jean Pierre Jouillet, who is Minister of State for European affairs in the Sarkozy or the Fillon government. I should say it's a particular pleasure for me to have Jean Pierre at this school because he and I have worked together in the past. When I was chairman of the FSA here and he was the head of the Tresor, we used to sit together in international. We used to sleep together sometimes in international committees looking at the financial system. And indeed outside that we met from time to time to try to explore the possibilities of co common positions between the French and the British on matters like the regulation of the single financial market in Europe. At that time he was rather in favor of consolidated regulation and I was against. And then Jean Pierre went to Barclays who were against consolidated regulation. And now I'm in favor, having left the fsa. But we are particularly pleased today that he's going to talk more broadly about Europe. As many of you know, I'm sure French will take over the presidency of the European Union and so will be in charge of the fate of the Union for the second half of this year. This fills some of us with anxiety because the last time Europe was run by a man with a strong personality, short of stature, with a rather glamorous consort. There was trouble from Trafalgar to Moscow. And we are hoping that this time the British will not have to step in as they did before to bring peace back to the continent. We will hear this afternoon the French plans for the European Union over the next six months. And nobody could be better placed to give us an insight than Jean Pierre Jouillet. Thank you.
- [02:26]
B
Mr. Chairman. Dear award, ladies and gentlemen, it's specific pleasure to see Howard Davis again. As you remember, we fight sometimes together, but you were always the best because of your very well known sense of humor, but also with your such distinction you are perhaps an equal.
- [03:01]
C
Was my great difficulty one of the last goalists in London.
- [03:07]
B
I cannot say that in Paris. It's a great honor to be here at the London School of Economics and Political Science. And I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to share views with this distinguished audience on the forthcoming French presidency of the EU Council. It's a very humbling experience to do so in English, but I'm quite sure that you will kindly allow me to deliver my speech with a French accent. As you are now familiar with it with more than 200 French pupils in this school and London ranking as the seventh biggest French city, as you know. I hope that in return you will see some flavor of the Franco British entente formidable. As Gordon Brown mentioned during the last visit of President Sarkozy, it's clear indeed for all our government that the Presidency's role is not to impose one's country's view, but to share the EU Council and find consensus and compromises to bring forward forward concrete answers to common challenges with our Czech and Swedish counterpart. We are seeking elements of compromise and consensus to build an 18 month agenda for Europe. But this is not just a trial exercise. President Sarkozy's speech in the Swissminster prized the UK's democratic vitality, economic success, cultural dynamism and attractiveness. France and the UK agree on most global issues such as Kosovo, Middle East, United nations reform, Chadan, Darfur or climate change. We share the same visions of the EU's responsibility to act on this issue. As you know, the Franco German relationship remains the core of our vision of European policies, but it should not be exclusive. Europe is important, but we know that in any field a fruitful and intense cooperation with the UK is a key factor for success. For example, I meet today Jim Murphy and other members of the government and I meet him regularly and John Connelly almost every six weeks. We hope then that the French presidency will be an opportunity to show that Europe can achieve institutional reforms, but also and above all deliver concrete results. Results that matter to European citizens. And where there are clear additional benefits from collective efforts as compared to action by individual member states. We will have a lot of work to do in a very short span of time. It's not the ambition of France and it's not a kind of arrogancy as.
- [07:23]
C
We can as we can read in different newspaper.
- [07:29]
B
It's because the legislative agenda is always very busy when we are close to the end of the Commissions and the European Parliament's tenures. And as you know, also, and unfortunately, unexpected events can always happen in the diplomatic or in the economic field. But we would like to emphasize and materialize the new role the European Union can play in a globalized world along four main priorities. First, Europe has to promote a greener Europe, secure energy supplies. Second, adopt an integrated approach of migration and demographic change. And fourth, also to strengthen European Union's capabilities to ensure peace and stability, adding up to to NATO's role without duplicating it. I want to stress that our first two priorities will go to climate change and Energy. I know in speaking with your chairman that you have a very great department in the London School of Economics, so I will stress on this point. We have discussed this topic extensively this morning with Jean Murphy, with some of your professors and France aims at reaching an agreement on the climate energy package in line with the objective that was agreed at the spring European Council. It is an ambitious goal as we must achieve consensus on a fair burden sharing within the EU that leads to efficient path of reduction of CO2 emissions. But we have no other choice than ambition. No other regional organization can act as a leading player on climate change and set standards in the Copernican negotiation round in 2009. It is for Europe a matter of credibility of world stability and of ensuring the well being of our children and grandchildren, as your professor Nicolas Stearns.
- [10:31]
C
Are.
- [10:31]
B
Shown in in his review. For every euro invested now, when it is timely enough in the fight against climate change, we can save €5 or possibly more. And I don't want to repeat that. But if we invest in pounds, the return on investment may be even greater.
- [11:00]
C
And I don't speak about the dollar and the yuan.
- [11:05]
B
But this will be possible only if Europe lives up to expectations. As a leading power in a low carbon economy, we will cut our CO2 emissions by 20% by 2, in comparison with 1990 levels and maybe 30%. If third countries also commit themselves to ambitious and binding targets. Our low carbon economy shall at the same time remain a competitive economy. Quota, restitutions and free quota that would be in conformity with WTO rules may be the adequate way forward. We are also counting on reinitiating discussion on a European energy strategy because current events have shown that the energy problem is becoming increasingly strategic. Energy policy is a good example of a field where we could benefit from more external unity in Europe. And it's also a matter of cooperation between our two countries because we want to preserve sovereignty.
- [12:43]
C
And now we.
- [12:44]
B
With the prices existing in the oil and the gas market, we are dependent or we have the risk to be more dependent tomorrow. This is mainly about seeking a level playing field between consumers and producers, because external producers cannot expect, expect. I apologize, an open EU market without reciprocity. We will therefore strive to secure European energy supplies and foster cooperation between major gas producers, transit countries and destination countries. The former Executive Director of the International Energy Agency, Claude Mandil, has just published a recommendation that will contribute to shape our proposals together with the Commission. Another priority is immigration and asylum. I was struck during my visits, whether it be in Malta, in London today, in Prague in the Baltic countries, also in Portugal, in Spain. By the fact that member states, whatever their culture, whatever their history, their political direction or their tradition, are now acutely aware about the interdependence of their government and of the knock on effects one's decision can have on their European partners. They also feel the need to cope with the likely decrease of European population. By 2020, 2030, we will have less than 25 billion of active population during this period. We will then propose a pact at the level of heads of states and government that will enshrine strong commitments for a long term balanced and efficient management of migrations from flows. It will also build on the concept of the global approach to migration forged in anton Court in 2005 under the previous UK presidency. It will tackle five main topics, most of them being of interest even for country like Brazil Britons which are not part of the Schengen area. But it's a common issue in enhancing border controls. Looking at how member states and the EU can make legal migration a success both for citizens and migrants by helping them to integrate and make a positive contribution to our society and their own. Implementing an effective return policy of illegal migrants, building a comprehensive and integrating approach of asylum. It will be the most difficult task and it will be a progressive approach and last but not the least, promoting co development with transit and origin countries. On the latter topic, a ministerial Euro African conference will be organized in Paris in October and special attention will be given to the brain drain in health sector and development aid on education and governance. French people are often blamed for advancing grand ideas with no follow up. We are a little bit more conceptual, but it depends. But the pact will have gained from the new political culture in France that you might have noticed in the last months. The pact will contain a follow up closed that implies a progress review every six months in the Justice Home Affairs Council. It is also closely connected with the Commission's agenda for legislation and operational cooperation. Ladies and gentlemen, you have now a presentation of the key priorities France plans to work on during its EU presidency. I hope they are legible and concrete enough. Madeleine Albright once said indeed that to understand Europe you have to be a genius or to be the French. I'm pretty sure that the British have not to become French and I am happy of this because we tried that once or twice through history and the result was not so brilliant. France alone can do nothing well if it does not pay attention to its neighbors and close. I prefer then to think that if France and Britain have a genius idea that of Working together with other partners. Europe will be what it must be, but it depends on our close cooperation. And it will depend also on our cooperation and in the defence area. And I want to conclude on that very important topic, because all nations of union willing to take part will be invited, without any loss of sovereignty, to envisage new unreal capabilities able to be built. And in the European strategy of defence, consistent with the role and responsibility of NATO, I believe the same guideline can be maintained for our new commencements. Where are we now on this very important topic? First, our security strategy dates back to 2003. Since then, new threats have emerged. The 2003 threats have evolved, especially proliferation and food security. The Eastern enlargement has been successfully managed as well in NATO as in European Union. A neighbourhood policy has been developed and a European Armaments agency has been set up. Europe must update its common security strategy. Second, we need to use the proper instruments to be able to implement this strategy. The EU has conducted so far some 15 defense and security operations. Thanks to those operations, which were often conducted within the framework of NATO and with NATO resources, we can make an initial assessment to determine the way forward. President Sakozy and Prime Minister Brown have committed qualified civilians to be available for post conflict stabilization under the EU's civilians headlines goal 2010 targets. They have also suggested to develop European military capabilities available to both The EU and NATO, in particular in the fields of the 400M carrier group operations and helicopters. This is an excellent start and we call on all our European partners who wish to do so to join this initiative in proportion to their own means. Third, President Sarkozy's visit to the United States and the Bukhari summit at the beginning of April showed that France could be open to take new responsibility within NATO, provided that simultaneously progress was made on the European defence policy. I believe that a new and trustworthy relationship can be built on this group. On this ground. I apologize. All these issues are difficult ones. I'm not saying at all that we will be able to resolve it during the French Presidency. It would be too ambitious. What we would like to do is to take it forward while respecting different histories and traditions. We know perfectly your tradition. We know that you don't want to have any duplication between NATO and the European Defence policy. And it's clear that we have to respect that. And we know that if we want to progress in this respect, we need to be in line with your concern about that. And I want also to insist before the next process of the ratification that neutral countries will remain neutral in this policy. So you see, we have a lot of work. We want to have ambition. We have at a crucial and turning point for the Europe building and the Europe cooperation. We need to have a closer cooperation with UK even if we have a strong cooperation with Germany and if it remains the core cooperation. And we share the view expressed by the British Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary that they have outlined their vision of an open, outward looking, flexible global Europe. It's clear that if Europe want to be global actors, a need to combine efficiency in the economic field, solidarity on the social aspects and also a great defence capacity. I hope that we can find a common ground for a European Union that can deliver on this objective. We need for that to have a strong cooperation with you. And to conclude, I want to apologize for not addressing so many economic issues in this very prestigious school. But I can answer to your question in other topics. And the main thing is, thank you very much for your patience and for my English. Thank you very much.
- [26:17]
A
Thank you very much. We'll now go straight into questions. The question I really want to ask, of course, which is on everybody's lips this week, is whether in the light of what's happening in domestic politics, President Zakarizi will make a visit to Edinburgh and say but I won't ask you that question, but who would like to. Who would like to be. Yeah. So microphones are here and they will come to you. Kevin Featherstone from the European Institute. I wonder, Minister, what you would say now on the initiative that the French have made with respect to the Mediterranean. Is this rhetoric or is this something substantively new?
- [27:10]
D
It's a very important question. It's not rhetoric why, but it's also a pragmatic approach. We first observed that the military land is border to Europe and power.
- [27:33]
B
The difficulties and all the instability in.
- [27:36]
D
The south military it has an impact on the European Senate in the first. Second, we want to enhance cooperation between the southern country, southern Mediterranean countries because it's the only zone where you have no integration, where you have no value of cooperation. And through concrete projects we try to improve this cooperation in the Maghreb and also in the oriental rigor of the Mediterranean between Israel and Assad and the other is not so easy as its current condition. And third, we consider that the Barcelona process and the euro of those are.
- [28:37]
C
Not very familiar with that.
- [28:40]
D
The Euro Mediterranean partnership has to be increased in three aspects. First is to have more equality between the southern Mediterranean countries and the European countries. There was not the same level of responsibility. For instance, in the Result of the project. Second, we consider that the governance has to be immense in that and you have a real challenge chairmanship on that with an independent secretariat. Even if the Secretary like grouping members.
- [29:25]
C
Of the Commission representative of some member.
- [29:30]
B
States and you can be considered depends on the extent.
- [29:38]
D
And we can have. We need also to have members of the representative of the South Mediterranean countries. And third, we need to have more project led orientation. In the Barcelona process we put more macroeconomic assistance. It was not a general budgetary, but not targeting. Not targeting on very concrete project as the pollution as connection as to promote solar energy in the Soviet Mediterranean, other renewable energies or maritime motorways and so on. We want to have let oriented project and very concrete project to live with director and with its new also public private partners. Because in Barcelona the private and the business was not associated with that. And it was a pity because there there was some money in the private sector in second, they have protect and they have ideas. And we have not enough money at the European level and at the national level to lead such projects. Very important for the stability. And I was concerned. To be clear, it's not because we are dealing with a specific paper for Mediterranean for the reason that I explained that we have not to continue to enhance the neighboring policy towards the. For instance, Central Asia countries. There is another border and we need also to stabilize this border. And it's not so easy. And we. I don't want to commend the Iran citizen yesterday and so on, but to see that you have also a specific role of Europe in Central Asia and that. And that we have to stabilize and we have to be strengthening the relationship with countries such Ukraine and other.
- [32:09]
A
This sounds to me like a strengthening of the various dialogues that already this. A separate club. It's not a new club you're talking about.
- [32:25]
B
No, it's not.
- [32:26]
C
We want to avoid to have a new club, Mr. Chairman, it's clear. And we want to avoid to have a duplication towards the Barcelona process.
- [32:38]
B
And try to. To clarify, to answer more precisely, if.
- [32:44]
C
You have good projects, if you have already existing good projects, we'll integrate in the new framework of Union Poglame Il. But we don't want to create a.
- [33:00]
B
New club and we don't want to.
- [33:03]
C
We want to enhance the cooperation. We want to give more political impetus, we want to give more visibility, but.
- [33:11]
B
We don't want also to duplicate what.
- [33:15]
C
Is already existing and which we could work also.
- [33:19]
A
Okay? Yes. Woman, the pink shirt, is it pink?
- [33:26]
B
Yes. We can say that from here.
- [33:29]
C
From here we can say that to.
- [33:31]
E
What extent do you think the UK government will support your proposal proposals during the presidency, particularly those on immigration and defence?
- [33:39]
B
Also a very accurate question.
- [33:44]
C
I think that on immigration we know that there is divergence, it's more a legal divergence, it's more a question of sovereignty for United Kingdom.
- [33:56]
B
But on the Commons goals we are confident that.
- [34:01]
C
That we can be supported by UK on that there are comments after. I know perfectly well that UK will have the room of maneuver to manage. But I don't expect any difficulty on the fact that these goals that I.
- [34:21]
B
Mentioned can be implemented even with the.
- [34:26]
C
UK specificity on that. And I told you in my presentation, the main difficulty will be about the azaleum. Right. But we will have also difficulty with Germany, with Poland, with other countries, because the rights and the tradition are in.
- [34:49]
B
This country more severe than they can.
- [34:51]
C
Be in France, for instance. The second aspect is about defence, about defence.
- [34:59]
B
I spoke quite frankly on that. It's not easy, it will not be easy.
- [35:07]
C
I think that UK and France have common interest and perhaps we will not be successful.
- [35:17]
A
It's.
- [35:18]
C
You see the other objectives. I think that the first objective on the climate change, Europe has to achieve.
- [35:27]
B
It'S ambitious, but we have to achieve.
- [35:29]
C
On immigration we have the possibility to achieve. In defense, we have to agree on the orientations that we cannot find. But only to countries in Europe have the possibility to raise the issue. It's the UK and France.
- [35:49]
B
Why?
- [35:49]
C
Because we are the only members in Europe who belong to the Security Council in the United nations and we are the only country to have nuclear weapons and so on. We have a specific responsibility. And third, we contribute a lot for the security of Europe and we have.
- [36:17]
B
A tradition of projection of military and civilian involvement.
- [36:23]
C
And when you consider the financing aspect, the two.
- [36:27]
B
Third of the expenses dedicated to the.
- [36:31]
C
Security come from UK and France and perhaps we have together to think about that. But we have to be pragmatic also. We have to be pragmatic, we have to need to respect the specificity. We know that you have transatlantic approach that we have not, and we know perfectly that. But we know also that now with Europe, which is a space for more than 500 millions of people, we need, if we want to have Europe as global actor, to make progress on that in avoiding in this field also any duplication or any useful duplication, unusual duplication with NATO on migration.
- [37:24]
A
Have you asked David Cameron, just in case he happens to be the government during your presidency? You don't need to ask.
- [37:30]
B
Thank you very much. It's a Good question.
- [37:33]
A
Is there man in the middle? Yeah. You may be a cleric.
- [37:41]
F
Yes, I am a spiritual cleric. Just to mention one thing. You mentioned non duplication of services. You also mentioned that neutral countries will remain neutral. Are you suggesting France is neutral? Or do you want to name one or two countries that are neutral?
- [38:00]
B
I'm not sure to.
- [38:03]
C
All the subtleties of the question now to answer very frankly is that you have.
- [38:10]
B
The neutrality is very important for some.
- [38:14]
C
Country, and specifically for Ireland, for instance. And we are saying clearly that we will respect that and we respect the. The neutrality and the tradition of neutrality of this country. You have other issues in Scandinavia, in Austria. But we want to have an open process and defense without.
- [38:41]
B
Shocking or.
- [38:45]
C
Troubling the tradition of the different European countries. And we know perfectly that there are.
- [38:52]
B
Different traditions in Europe.
- [38:54]
A
Man at the back there, blue shirt, hand up.
- [39:00]
G
Thank you. Minister, could you throw some light on the question of what qualities the French government will be looking for above all in the choice of the first president of the Council of the European Union? Put it like this. Do you think it will be important that the person does not come from one of the countries of the EU that hasn't joined important parts of the program like the euro or the Schengen? Or do you think it's more important that he shouldn't come from or that he shouldn't be a small politician who's not well known in the world? I'm not mentioning any names like the Prime Minister of Luxembourg, but. And perhaps you might just add a century, add a sentence on how you see the role of this important new title and personality developing, particularly will you anticipate frictions or difficulties in bedding down in relations with the president of the Commission and the other heads of government?
- [40:03]
A
So are you still backing Blair?
- [40:06]
B
No. It's a very good summary.
- [40:11]
C
It's clear that I have to tell you that another duty that we will.
- [40:18]
B
Have during the presidency is to set.
- [40:21]
C
Up the new treaty and to make in due time the different appointments for the chairman of the European Council and for the ICE representative for the Foreign affairs. We are not deserved. It's just a question of agenda. And it will be the responsibility of the presidency if the ratification is.
- [40:47]
B
Over.
- [40:48]
C
And when the ratification will be over, we have not to forget that. Second, the qualities and the fact. It's clear that Tony Blair had many and has many qualities to lead the European Council. He has charism. He has a very good visibility on the international scene. He has experience because he was prime minister during 10 years. He has all the graces on that. But it's also clear that as a presidency and not as friends, we have to take into account what is the feeling in the different parties of Europe, not only on the national basis, but also between the European Popular Party, the Socialist European Party and so on. And it seems that at the current time there is no majority. And it's why that also name are floating. And there are different profile also and very good experience in Europe. No more, no less in that. And it's clear that we have to.
- [42:22]
B
See what the duty of presidency.
- [42:25]
C
You cannot act without having the sensibilities of the different parties in Germany or in other countries, in Spain and so on, in different countries. So it's clear that we have to take that into account. For me, I want only to stress that the choice has to be made in 10 months.
- [42:52]
B
So I see.
- [42:54]
C
And perhaps the race is gone early, too early. It's only a personal opinion on that. On the institutional side, it's a question of personalities. I don't expect many difficulties between the chairman of the Commission and. And the chairman of the Council. It will depend on the personalities and the ability to work each other. The scope of the responsibility is not the same. I repeat that the chairman of the European Council has to prepare the work of this European Council as to ensure the continuity of the job. And he has not the responsibilities devoted to the president of the Commission and more substantively in the communitarian policies and so on. So there is a complementary. The main difficulty and we will have to see that in how not the tandem will be where, but how the trio. We will work with the IF representative, the chairman and the Council and the chairman and the Commission. And the difficulty perhaps is not at the place where you can guess where he is in your questions.
- [44:32]
A
A number of people are catching my eye now, but I think the next question is just on the end here.
- [44:41]
H
Minister Ron Mohot from Fidelity International. I wanted to ask if you might elaborate on your priorities for financial services during your presidency and in particular whether you envisage any new regulation in the wake of the credit crunch and what measures you envisage taking to encourage Europeans to save more for retirement in light of changing demographics.
- [45:07]
A
Thank you. You're being dragged back to your role as head of the Tatar.
- [45:10]
B
Yes, yes.
- [45:11]
C
And I will speak under the control.
- [45:13]
B
Of Howard Davis on that. And we will see. I will be to be sure.
- [45:19]
C
I think that you have to draw the consequences of the subprime crisis on that. And we need to have more coordination and cooperation at the European Level we need to improve the cooperation and the coordination between the regulators. Perhaps we have to adapt to regulation, but we don't need to have a revolution in the regulation. There is no. It was no such problem of regulation on that we have to ensure more transparency and we need to have more cooperation, Cooperation, coordination and to see how to ensure transparency in the banking system, in the insurance system, in the different rating agency and so on. And I think that we have to do that at the European level. But we are quite. We are not as French ideologic in that we can live with different system. The most important is the goal. And the goal is to enhance transparency and that and to localize where are the risk, to have a good math, to follow the different risk and to see how to catch these risks with very better and a closer cooperation between. Between the different regulatory bodies. It will be our purpose during our presidency.
- [47:00]
A
Maybe we should organize a debate here between Nick Leeson and Jerome Kermiel. One in the middle here.
- [47:13]
I
Yes, thank you, Acham Holtzenberger from the German Embassy. And I'd like to turn the debate a bit to the economic questions. The framework of the EU is the Lisbon Strategy for growth and employment. And at an earlier stage it was said that the French presidency would enhance the social dimension of that. Now, that was missing from your speech. Does that mean that you dropped this? Or what kind of ideas do you have in mind for the French presidency?
- [47:40]
C
No, it's clear that I cannot.
- [47:42]
B
I prefer to answer to your question and.
- [47:45]
C
And I only focus on the main priority. But it's true, and we had the debate this morning with also academics and different experts.
- [48:04]
B
I think that the Lisbon strategy has.
- [48:07]
C
To be adapted in three dimensions. First, it's a strategy built on the traditional competitiveness. And now we have to integrate the dimension of the fight against the climate change, for instance. So you have to integrate in the Lisbon strategy a more sustainable development. Second, it's true that we have also to integrate more social dimension in training, in education, in the mobility of the workers, in integration of people without employment and the poorest people, and so on. And when we had discussion with my British counterpart or my German counterpart, we are thinking on the fact to try to address new pilot experiments on that and perhaps during the French presidency. It's an ongoing process. We have not to create trouble for continuous action, but it's true that we want to promote more mobility and more integration between the different member states for the workers, like you have now with the Erasmus program for the more qualified students. And third, in the Lisbon strategy. We have to integrate the external dimension and it has also a social impact because if you fight against the global, the global warming, you have to take into account the necessity to maintain competitiveness in some industrial sectors and so on to avoid any delocalization of activities, any loss of employment in Europe. And you need to have to address also some reciprocity with countries as US and Japan as the same and it's an understatement, the same standard of life that in Europe and the same capacity to act in this run that you are. So we want to add an external dimension with social impact on the activity in Europe in the Lisbon strategy. And perhaps we try to open the debate, but we are. Don't forget that we are at a turning point also because it's the end of the tenure of the Commission and the European Parliament. And we have to bear that in mind.
- [50:59]
A
We have a question from the cheap seats up here. Thank you.
- [51:06]
J
I was just wondering if you could clarify the French position on harmonization of the corporation tax base and potentially corporation tax rates. Some comments made recently by your colleague, the French Finance Minister, whose name I have forgotten, worried some people in this country and quite a lot of people in. In Ireland, where it's more important at the moment for obvious reasons. I was just wondering whether this is a realistic objective for the French presidency or whether her comments should be read as purely for domestic political consumption.
- [51:42]
B
Thank you.
- [51:46]
C
No, I will be. I think that it's not the most appropriate moment to speak about tax.
- [51:53]
A
And.
- [51:55]
B
Second is that in the Lisbon Treaty you have still the unanimity for.
- [52:03]
C
All the tax matters. Third, whatever the German and French view on the possibility to harmonize, not the rate, but the basis is not the same. Not the basis there is Franco German willingness and other countries in that. But because it's unanimity and you can see that the island will be safe, could be safe on that. We don't want create any trouble about the ratification process in Ireland and any other country. It's our duty as a presidency. Whatever the French feeling about that. It's clear that we want to make our duty. Our duty is to have a ratification of the treaty during our presidency.
- [53:02]
A
First.
- [53:03]
C
Second thing through the unanimity, always we say in Tax Island, UK and so on. But I can tell you, because we are only between us that whatever the.
- [53:18]
B
Personality will lead the country.
- [53:20]
C
You have other countries very, very, very interested in the tax organization in Europe, even in Benedict.
- [53:32]
A
I think we'll just have one more actually. Right. The woman at the back who's been very patients.
- [53:40]
E
Thank you. I just wonder if you could share with us your thoughts on the strength of the Euro, how it's affecting the different constituents of the Eurozone and whether that's something that you'll address in your presidency.
- [53:58]
B
I think that we have to take into account two facts. First, when you have this level of.
- [54:10]
C
Energy prices, oil and gas prices, the.
- [54:16]
B
Strength of the euro, it's protecting the European citizens and the purchase power. Second, we noticed in all European countries.
- [54:34]
C
A rise in the prices, you have a rise in the inflation and in regard to that, you also the strength.
- [54:47]
B
Of the Euro, it's an advantage. Third, if you want to improve the visibility of the Eurozone, to have to.
- [54:58]
C
Be a global actor on that, to.
- [55:01]
B
Have a strong currency is not a disadvantage on that. Fourth, but on the other side, it's.
- [55:10]
C
Clear that the.
- [55:15]
B
Too rapid appreciation of the Euro create difficulties for some specific.
- [55:24]
C
Industries, aeronautics, automobile and some other equipment industries. And you have to take that into account. I think that now you have a consensus on the fact that you need to find an equilibrium and to avoid any excessive volatility in the exchange rate and in the appreciation of the Euro. So it's a question of balance. I think that there is a consensus in Europe in that between the European Central bank, the other deciders in Germany, in France and other countries in the Eurozone. But I have to confess that the job of the chairman of the ECB is not easy in that because first, he's not alone and second, the different aspects of the question are quite complex now.
- [56:24]
A
But third.
- [56:27]
B
It'S French, but it's not always an advantage, you know, even in France.
- [56:32]
A
I'm afraid we're going to have to stop now. We have to stop promptly tonight because the Minister has to get on the train. And indeed we also have someone else coming in here at 6:30. You were very kind to speak to us in French, but nonetheless, perhaps it would beaucoupisme.
- [57:02]
B
Will.
- [57:39]
A
You will thank in the normal way.