 Italian Chamber of Deputies. Welcome to Timo Suini, who is Foreign Minister of Finland and also Deputy Prime Minister, Leader of the Finns Party, which he founded with three colleagues 20 years ago. He also is a big fan of a British football club called Millwall Football Club. And for those who haven't heard, their motto is they have a famous chant, we are Millwall, we are Millwall, no one likes us, we don't care. So I don't know if that has any bearing on Timo's political education and success, but it's great to welcome him to this panel. Also joining me, Adam Holloway. Adam is a Conservative Member of Parliament who quit the Conservative government to press for a referendum on Brexit. And he's a prominent advocate of leave and it'd be fascinating to hear from him too about his take on how these new challenges leave the United Kingdom and what its contribution to this new direction in Europe could be. And lastly, Roger Kerpel. Roger has a distinguished career as a journalist, but he's set journalism to one side as a member of the Swiss People's Party and he sits in the Swiss Parliament and is an interesting and vocal commentator as well as an active politician. And I'm sure he and Adam, as well as sharing a car up and down the mountain, will have an interesting conversation too on their perspectives about some of these challenges. Sorry to correct you. I'm still acting entrepreneur and publisher, which is possible in Switzerland because we have a system where you can be in politics, but which is good also, do a normal job. That's an interesting... A real job. I'm glad to hear that there are places where that's still possible, although in Britain, I think, you'd run into trouble if you were holding down two jobs at the same time. Crazy. I'm going to start just by asking each of our panelists to kind of give a little tour d'horizon of where we are right now. We see a Europe that's facing demographic challenges. It has an aging population. It's facing issues with migration. It's facing issues over its security, both its security in terms internally with potential homegrown terrorism threats, but also externally, in terms of spending enough on its own security and the future of NATO. It's also facing challenges economically as other parts of the world emerge, as India and China step up to become really major players in the global economy. So all of these challenges hitting, as well as some of the technological challenges, we've seen the Fourth Industrial Revolution taking jobs throughout the promise of automation, but also the threat of automation to people who see robots not as an enabler, but as something that might take away their living. So I'm going to turn first to Carla Rocco. Carla, five-star movement, very recent entry into Italian politics, but it's already made a big noise. What do you see as the challenges that your new movement needs to address? Five-star movement has a very important role because it approaches the politics very near to citizens and to citizens' needs in all contexts. In particular, in this period, there are a lot of big change and there are some threats and some opportunities. It's very important that the government catch the opportunities, but from the point of view of citizens. How can we do? We can give to each country to growing, to grow the rising their economic system. But in the meantime, it's important to share the problem in a European context. I speak about, for example, risk sharing in the field of financial point of view or even for the problem about the migrations. So there are some opportunities that must be catch for the growing of each state. This is important. And this European framework doesn't give a good evaluation because there are some very strictly rules even in the field of financial and it is not a good way to share at an international level the huge problems that can't find a solution in this way but can also be postponed if they are not faced in an international level. So it's important that there are some movements that pose some questions and some solutions to the older style way to make policy. So, Tima, you started your movement almost as a sort of political garage band and you've grown up a grassroots movement in Finland. You're also now in government. How has that experience kind of shaped your political journey? Do you find it was easier when you were on the outside looking in and it's tougher now that you're actually in a position of power? My motivation to be and when I did go to the politics was to have an impact to make a difference. And of course, when we gained very good election results in due course of time, I took that this is my responsibility to go to the government. Even I knew that it will most probably decrease our support in the polls. But if you have an agenda what you want to go through with, then you must go into the government and that I have done and make an impact and make a difference in Finnish politics. Of course, not that much, I wanted to. But when you have 17%, you shouldn't dictate. And what do you see as the challenges in the Europe's facing right now? If you had to kind of put them in the top three order from your perspective from the Finns party, which is spoken out against things like immigration, you're critical of the EU. What would you rank the things that Europe's facing right now? I think the biggest is uncertainty and the big blocks are on the move. So-called old order has been challenged in the big way. And that goes also the other side of Atlantic and so forth. I think the thing one is that there are new policies challenged the old ones as new parties. Then there are also phenomenons where there are new strong streams within the parties, for example, in the Republican party. There is now no new party, but there are people who have had their influence and renewed the party system. Then of course, I think even though the challenging parties are very different from the national background, but there are old and to me tired parties nearly in every country. And people just don't think it's enough that you have very established EPP party like in the European Parliament. And the alternative to that is socialist group. And they are not exactly challenging each other and that is why there is a room for something new. And the third one, which I think Europe is very useful for is the security and foreign policy cooperation. That is what I support. Our neighborhood is very troubled and we need cooperation security-wise because we are dependent with each other in security-wise. That is a positive thing. Roger, I mean, Timo touched there on one of the issues that we see across Europe, which is a kind of disgruntlement with the existing sort of managerialist party politics, where voters don't really see much difference between red and black or socialist and social democratic and mainstream conservative. The Swiss People's Party was kind of an early entrant into that game, but also Switzerland itself is a direct democracy and a very participatory democracy, which is, again, one of those things that the new politics is very interested in. Brexit had its referendum. People are pushing now for more input from voters into decision making. So what's been your experience? Because it's been a little double-edged, isn't it? You've been successful in getting Swiss voters to say, yes, to restrictions on immigration, but then it looks like the parliamentary process in Switzerland is actually kind of working to reverse that decision or kind of put it back in its box. Yeah, we have to define Switzerland first. I mean, you have to understand Switzerland is considered to be a direct democracy, but I always say to my friends in Germany or England, that's not true. Actually, Switzerland is the best organized anarchy in the world. I mean, you don't know at the beginning of a political process who is going to decide it's a whole mess, but at the very end, mostly very reasonable decisions emerge. I have to probably explain a bit the situation. If I look at Europe now and the discussions we have in Italy, in Finland, in Germany, also in England, I think I see that in Switzerland, we had the very same discussions already in the 90s. The question was, do we want to be part of the European Union? Yes or no? Our political elites, they were all in favor. They said, OK, Switzerland has to go in, but the voters, the normal people, the democratic sovereign was against it and said, no, we have to preserve our independence, our self-reliance. And I think Switzerland was attacked of being isolationist and they don't want to be part of the world. And I think this is a huge understanding. And I was very impressed by Prime Minister Theresa May's speech yesterday. And she said something which somehow epitomizes the Swiss position as well. Independent national state which decides on its own destiny with a democracy where people try to find solutions for their country and do that. That is no contradiction to an international role. Absolutely. So you can be self-reliant, independent, but you can also play a global role. I would even go further. I would say a membership or an attachment to a European Union limits your international role. But in order to be really open to the world, you have to preserve your flexibility, your national independence. So Switzerland, also my party, which is also considered populist today, you know what a populist is? Whenever you don't have a reasonable agreement against something you don't like, you say he's a populist. 40 years ago, they said he's a communist. Now everybody's a populist. Switzerland wants to. I get to hear, Roger, any politician who wants to be an unpopulist. Sure. No, but just Switzerland wants cooperation with everybody. We want a good cooperation also with the EU, but we don't want to marry the EU. So the question now that is up, and this is from my last remark in Europe, I meet a lot of people and they are not psychiatrists, psychiatric cases. They are not consumed by fear and paranoia. But there are many people who think, and they have good reasons to believe, that the EU in its current shape is on the wrong track. It's on the wrong track. And that was the decision behind Brexit. Many British people thought it's on the wrong track. We don't trust this structure. There are institutional flaws in the EU. They are not addressed. The political elites in the EU say, we can manage everything. We have shuffled us. We can achieve this. And there is a growing discontent. And this is now open to democratic debate. And this is something that I think is good. We had it in Switzerland 20 years ago. Well, you're setting up in a perfect way Adam Holloway, who has a strong commitment to not marrying the EU, but divorcing from it. And Adam, you're in a slightly strange position because you're not from a new political party. The Conservative party goes back and back in time, probably 200 years in UK politics. But at the same time, you've always been on the populist side of that politics. I can recall one of the first time you made it into politics. You've been a soldier. You've been a journalist. But you campaigned with a dog with a Union Jack vest on it. You've tapped into a kind of populist vein. To what extent do you share some of the diagnosis that you've heard around from colleagues here? And to what extent do you differ? I mean, are the old parties in need of the kind of new movements that Carla represents and that Timo represents? Our party is very old as well. I mean, we go back to the 19th century in Switzerland, actually, but just be similar to the Conservatives in England. I mean, I think firstly, we shouldn't see... We do see the word populist as somehow being pejorative. But I think what people describe as populism emerges when the ordinary voter feels that things are out of control and that people aren't really representing what they think. So let's talk about Brexit, for example. I mean, in my constituency, it was the most Eurosceptic in Kent. And I can completely understand why 65% of the people in my constituency who voted voted for Brexit. Because they'd seen their communities change. I mean, just in the 12 years that I've been in my constituency, it has changed dramatically. And the main driver of that change has been immigration, not just from the EU, but from all around the world. And vis-a-vis EU immigration, we have lots of people who have come in from Eastern Europe making rational, sensible choices for their families that I would make if I was in the same position as them. But large numbers of Roma from Slovakia, lots of fabulously well-educated, hardworking people from Poland. But if you are in a lower socioeconomic group and you see very able people coming in and you see it as taking your job, if you find that you're now living in a street where most of the people are no longer speaking English, you start to feel a sense of things being sort of out of your control. And that's why I think most of my constituents voted for Brexit, including very large numbers of my constituents got about 12% seeks in it who've come over the last 40 years, mainly from the town of Jalandhar in the Punjab. And I mean, it shouldn't have surprised me, but at first it did. I would say the overwhelming majority of the seeks voted for Brexit for the same reasons as everybody else in the constituency or the majority of other people in the constituency. So it's this feeling, I think, of things being out of control. And I don't think we should see the word populist as being pejorative. I think it shows that mainstream politics isn't actually hitting it where the mainstream population want it. This is seen as we're almost sort of elites governing on their own behalf and not actually for the people that we're elected to represent. So one of the criticisms we've seen in the last four or five years is that there's been rising inequality, especially in the developed economies, and that this inequality has ignored ordinary people that you've seen a squeezed middle class coming down. Now, I guess the answer of political scientists would be that politics is supposed to be the break on that. Politics is supposed to bring business around and say, hang on a second, you guys have to redistribute some of these benefits. You can't just spend it on bonuses and extra remuneration at the top level. You've got to share some of that with people. So why haven't politicians done that? And will the new politics and the new politicians be doing more of that? What do you think, Colin? If I start with, there is a narrative on that one that if you want to motivate the rich people, get him bonuses and get him more. If you want to motivate the poor people, get its benefits. And that is, what is the outcome of this? Of course, people get angry, because if you are well off, let's have more. And if you are not well off, let's take that little amount of money from you in order to motivate you. And then of course, this populist jargon, jargon I would say, I think the elites and media and many others are putting a label to you because you are challenging them. And then they are saying that people are simple and they don't know about the things. The same people, if they vote, conservatives and socialists in the parliament elections, they are responsible voters. And that cannot be that way. Paula. Starting from the 2008, there is a big crisis that invests the European context in particular. And this is the reason why, for example, as I told before, for example, migrants that sometimes even have the right to go out from their country because of the wars. And but they find a very difficult situation in the middle class of that place that they go. Because of the crisis and because of the governments doesn't give the security, doesn't give a perspective to the citizens. So the confidence disappear and appear certain afraid. And for these reasons, excuse me, for these reasons, they, for example, defined populism in a not right way. Some movements that can instrumentalize some problems and they are not concentrated on a proposal on the solutions of that problems. In the country, a populist movement in the right way of term means that you are near to the needs of the citizens and you can form a government that can solve, gives a perspective for the future. For example, through universal income that in a certain way can give the possibility to an economical restructuring because of the very big change of the labor market. But how would things like that work? Because we're supposed to be in a European union where people can move around. So three million unemployed Italians, they should be going for jobs, shouldn't they, under that principle in Czechoslovakia in new auto factories or in Helsinki. That doesn't seem to be happening. If you're gonna be offering universal basic income, which is a really interesting concept that's been discussed this week here, how do you make sure that Italians get it and not say young Spanish people so that you don't have a situation where, say, if Timo likes that idea with five and a half million Finns, three million unemployed Italians don't move to Helsinki to take the universal basic income he's offering. How do you actually put in place some of those policies in the current framework? Yes, but before I spoke about that, some problems must be sharing at even at an international level that go out of the lines of such over the single nations. And for example, in this European framework in particular is not good, for example, for a country like Italy, there is a problem of competitiveness of businesses, of our businesses that must be faced in a European context. So there are different problems that must be faced and not only in internal, but even to have a face in international, over-national face. One of the reasons people attribute to the rise of more populist and more, if you like, anti-politics in Europe is a discontent, a disquiet, even a disgust, maybe, with traditional political behavior. They want to see people who are not traditional politicians coming in and speaking up for them. And you've been a journalist, you've been a journalist and a soldier, you're not from a traditional political background. And Tima, I think you're probably, are you a lifelong? I'm a politician. A lifelong politician. By definition. By definition. So how do we resolve that? Because isn't one of the problems, one of the mottos, I think, used in the Brexit campaign, but was actually used 10 years earlier in a very small local campaign by a chap called Dominic Cummings, who's a very smart young political campaigner, was politicians talk, we pay. And that, when you say that, that sounds very attractive. Politicians, what do they actually do? They just talk. You know, what's Davos about? It's just talking. Talk, talk, talk. When can we get to action? When can we do stuff? How do you deal with that, Roger? How do you combat that kind of cynicism by voting? I mean, if you really look at the reality of how it's out there, can talk about Switzerland. What does a politician basically has to do in a democracy? He has to listen to the people. He has to figure out what is good for his country. And of course, he has to take seriously the concerns of the people out there. Probably not all of those concerns are rational, whatever. Politicians are not rational either, in many respects. And I saw that in the 90s and in the years of the year 2000, you saw a growing discontent in most of the European countries. A lot had to do with migration, of course, migration. Everybody who addressed, he said, we don't want to have open borders. We don't want to have this uncontrolled migration. Was considered a racist. He was also at the World Economic Forum. It sophisticated diagnosis, these people. They are consumed by fear, whatever. They just didn't want migration. And there is the growing sentiment, and I think it's based on reality, that politicians, mainstream politicians, didn't care for what the people wanted. Instead, they started to vilify or even defame these people. And when you do this in a government or in a political establishment, if you start to talk down on the people, this is a very dangerous thing. And we see it in some European countries already, that also radical movements start to emerge, which is the result of political elites not addressing the source of people. Take the migration crisis 2015. I mean, this was a breach of the German law by Chancellor Merkel. She was not allowed to open the borders for all these non-registered migrants. That was just a breach of Article 16, Article 16 of the German Constitution. She did it. And of course, there were many people saying, hey, we cannot do that. We don't want that. Who gave the mandate to our Chancellor? We're not the monarchy. She had to do this either in parliament or whatever by popular vote. She didn't do it. And the people who criticized that were heavily defamed by the government. And this gave rise to the alternative for Germany in Germany, especially. And this is dangerous. If the politician starts to look down on the people, then you're in trouble. Adam, I just want to come to you on that. How does the political system as it's currently set up? I know there are differences in every European country and the way they manage the democratic process. But broadly speaking, how can it be the case that your party a year ago wins a fantastic mandate to govern? And then a year later finds itself almost running against its own supporters. And it's taken, well, I mean, your prime minister then, David Cameron, was a firm tagganist of Remain and a lot of his cabinet, too, including the current prime minister, has it taken this vote, this referendum, to reconnect you with voters in a way that the general election didn't? You know, I really don't think, I mean, I wish it had, but I don't think it had. I mean, I think the root of this, that we have a problem throughout the world, really, but particularly marked in my experience of this awful sort of professional managerial political class, these creatures right across the political spectrum who are in the Conservatives or the Labour Party at a good university. They move into a research job in a political party. They start working for an MP. They become an MP early. And they're literally on a sort of career ladder with very little real diversity of experience. And I think this leads to all sorts of problems. I was in Southern Turkey, not that far from the Syrian border the day before yesterday. And I was sitting with these refugees from Aleppo who were really struggling to pay very high rents in this town in Southern Turkey. And I just, I looked at them and I suddenly started to say to myself, wow, you're the victims of George Bush and Tony Blair. And I really do think it's fair to relate this because we have, we commit to wars on the most sparse level of knowledge. We have votes to bomb countries. Most of the people voting on it couldn't even put their finger on a map. And I think that this is because we're partly driven by this almost career sequence. And what we actually need is we need to inject people who've actually been out there a little bit. That's a good point and an interesting critique. And if I can put you in a pigeonhole, it's a slightly populist critique. Now let me turn to a professional politician maybe to defend them. Timo, you've self identified as a professional politician. How do you react to that critique of professional politicians coming from someone who sits for a 200 year old party? It's, there is many paths to the politics. And of course, if you are a politician by definition, it doesn't mean necessarily that you are uprooted from the daily life, but it enables it very easily. If you don't go to the constituency, if you don't go to the football games or horse track or the ordinary shops, the thing is how do you deliver to your constituency? And that is by doing it with the rank and file people who actually elect you. It is very easy to be in the fancy meetings and discuss with international things. It's also important, but the legitimacy to do so comes from your constituency. And if you are not present there, you have no right to perform. Karl, I want to turn to you a second. One of the more interesting speakers this week from the world of politics was President Santos from Columbia who won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work in helping to bridge the divide and the 52 year old civil war in his country. One of the things he faced was a referendum, which he lost. He put the peace process that he'd negotiated to the Colombian people and they rejected it at the polls. One of the things he said that it taught him was a huge humility about the process that he was involved in. He'd worked on ending a civil war. He'd worked diligently over four years with people who were terrorists in the eyes of his army and some of his colleagues to try and get an agreement on a complicated thing that divided, killed a lot of people and then the voters rejected. He didn't actually step down after that. He carried on working, but he said he worked with a renewed sense of needing to both explain to people better what he was doing and also respond to their fears and their needs. Is there a need from your perspective to really reform some of the kind of traditional processes that we have in place, the old representational democracy systems that we have around and build in a bit more swissness maybe or a bit more participation into those processes? Yes, of course. I think that participation is a very important aspect for citizens. So this kind of democracy, these instruments must be growing in each country. And because and then must in a certain way listen the answer of the citizen for a referendum. The people want through a referendum. In Italy, for example, people ask a new government and they had asked even through a referendum. But after that moment, Italy didn't pass to an electoral, to the citizen and a vote for citizens, but they formed another similar government like the previous one. This is not right because if you ask something to citizens, it's important that you listen what the citizen told you. And that's why we ask for a vote. We ask for the way in which the people can participate because I noticed that is a very important aspect the possibility give to the population to participate. There is a very big distance that the politicians of old style politicians are very far from the people. And for this reason, there are a lot of instruments to listen to get nearer to the population. One of these is the referendum. It's not important that any illogical point of view. It's important that you want to listen to the citizen, you want to solve their problems and to give some perspective. This is the way. Roger, I'm not trying to set you up with a new export opportunity to go along with sort of watches and chocolate with democratic consulting. But obviously Switzerland's got a lot of experience in this kind of feedback mechanism. But is it also the case that you can probably lend a little more wisdom here because does it put politicians in the position of both having to listen to voters but also perhaps having to take responsibility for decisions that are awkward to implement and that voters expect to see carried through without necessarily themselves wanting to face the consequences of. So in other words, voters tell you they want something. You work out how to deliver it. But in delivering it, you're going to end up maybe punishing them or delivering something that might not end up liking. How do you resolve that kind of paradox as a politician? I mean, democracy as a form of government is actually based on the principle that the people do not trust their politicians. They say they can vote them out after four years, five years, whatever. And in Switzerland, the degree of mistrust is even higher because the Swiss... Is that because you've got second jobs? No, because the Swiss... That's good. No, that's true for everybody because the Swiss mistrust you even after they have elected you because then they come up with initiatives with referenda. And this is a difference to the Brexit probably a little bit because it's not so that the politician can say, okay, we give a referendum or an initiative to the people. It's on the people's initiative. They can say, I don't agree with Köppel and his stuff and his party. I want to have something else. Then they gather all the signatures and then there's a vote if they get enough. And what's the effect of that? This system is a system which is very good for the citizens but of course it's like a prison for the politicians because the politicians they would like to realize their fantastic utopias, their great ideas by the way the European Union has been implemented. The Euro for example without any vote of the people in Germany. A German politician once told me if we had a vote on the introduction of the Euro in Germany the people would have said no but this question was so important we couldn't let it go to the people. It was us politicians. That's this arrogance that is not good. And in Switzerland you have to see for a politician, direct democracy is a hard system because it reminds you all the time you don't have only to listen to the politicians just listen, it's not enough. As a politician in Switzerland you have to do what the people have obliged you to do and they give you very precise stuff to do. And if you don't do it the chance that you're out at the next election is very very high and this has a disciplinary this disciplines our politicians because they know with every decision they make do I get through with the people? Or is there somebody out there who will launch an initiative? Therefore it's very good for Switzerland but of course we have a very very long tradition of it and I wouldn't I'm not an imperialist I don't say adapt our system and you can be inspired by it of course but it's a good system for Switzerland probably it's also a direction that the EU has to take to ask more what the people want and then really do it not just listen, really do it. Timer how do you avoid as a politician being captured when you've got new ideas about how to how to challenge an existing system how do you avoid when you enter that system in your case going into a sort of coalition system if you like having that making those compromises and ending up not delivering to your core constituents on what you promised you deliver when you went into government? I have functioned on three different levels I have been the city councillor for years then I went to the European Parliament then I went to the Parliament and government and they are different types but for example in the local government if I hadn't been compromised and doing things I wouldn't have been able to save the school in our area but I negotiated with others with other things and I was able to preserve the school and then European Union Parliament that was a kind of adventure I would say that it's still there but it cannot deliver very well and then of course in the governmental level the option of course would be we have two very good election results first we didn't go in because of immoral moral hazardous bailout policy but we were four years in the opposition and what effect that did have to the bailout policy? Nothing so now we decided with a good election result to go there and get some items and some systems through but of course it's always challenging but if you don't develop as a politician as a person it's like to play in fourth division even you have ability to play in the Premier League I just want to turn to you on that issue about politics and the disconnect you've said you're very critical of professional politicians and the career politician class at what point do you feel having come out of a life spent reporting on wars and as a soldier actively on active service do you come out and feel actually I've done politics so long now I am a politician and I need to stop I need to do something else I actually really relate to what you just said I think it's a real problem but to go back to this point about second jobs for politicians people sort of see that in terms of greedy members of parliament making money etc and I don't think that should be what it's about I think we should have politicians who are engaged in the real world the people saying the most interesting things about health in the UK the very few doctors who are still actually doing surgeries for example in the national health service so I think you need politicians who are kind of out there in the real world and we've ended up with sort of settled consensuses within the sort of the politics and the journalism sort of things that are sort of taken as true so let's take the migrant crisis until very recently everyone was a desperate refugee fleeing war etc when the reality is that actually most of the migrants who make it to Europe are the relatively privileged few who've got the money to pay the people smugglers and I say this from some experience I lived undercover in the sangat camp in France we were mostly fit young men whose family had sold a parcel of land in Kurdistan or wherever else in order to seek a better life in Europe but there's this kind of consensus and unless you have politicians and I'm not suggesting everyone goes and lives in the sangat camp but unless you have politicians who've had some experience of these places and of these situations then you'll end up making colossal policy mistakes like Mrs Merkel made in Germany and we sent this message to everyone living within 40 hours drive of the Mediterranean that if you get to Europe you'll stay in Europe and that's very bad for the countries in question it's completely uncontrolled for the countries that are receiving people so we've got to get away from the consensus on everything and have more real diversity in our politicians I can add something that Adam just said I mean I defend Angela Merkel because it's now mainstream that everybody's against her but of course you're right I mean the decision was a mistake but you have to understand I mean the German government is a German politician when there are poor people whatever their motives are are outside the European Union the Germans cannot send their troops there with dogs and machine guns to keep those people off that's from their history impossible I mean the Germans she had to do it somehow but the deeper problem here is and this is what this whole migrant crisis shows the destruction of the European Union as it is today is an intellectual misconception it was constructed by people by politicians who didn't ask their voters who did stuff that was not at all rooted in the daily experience of the people and now we see the symptoms and the open borders that the EU is not able to control its borders way through the migrants to Switzerland it's not because the Italians are bad it's because they have no incentive to control the border so this is a wrong construction and we have to address it now and it comes out just to bring you in and also Carla just to go back to the thing about borders and openness borders have been open 20 odd years and Schengen came into being in a large part of Europe why aren't we seeing Italian young unemployed Italians behaving like economic migrants and moving to those jobs around what's stopping them from going to where the jobs are in Europe we're complaining aren't we about migrants passing through these countries but what about the people who need the jobs who actually are members people with the EU passports why aren't we seeing them going to other places is something that you're concerned about equipping some of your young people outside Italy or do you want to keep them inside Italy being Italian is it fundamental to you that they stay put in Naples or do you want to see them equipped to go and get those jobs in Prague or jobs somewhere in Berlin what's your that's the important issue is that it must be a planification of a solution of this problem and a matching even in job market I can't receive a huge amount of not controlled people I can't know if they're the right to stay in Italy or they have not the right so this problem must be faced even analyzing the causes because there are some trigger after the trigger the amount became very very high and the population that escapes that escaped from the worse is growing now so we have to analyze to face even the cause of this phenomenon and for example at an international level to reduce the number of worse and that causes this growing and that can that became not manageable at all and for this reason this is the way in which can create afraid for the security Carla can I just say to you we're talking about new policies from new political movements for Europe how about supporting young Italians in disadvantaged economic areas to move to where the jobs are in Europe because currently is Europe offering anything to those people helping them to equip them for those jobs is opening a new plant in Toulouse how can you be sure that someone who's in Puglia is able to go and compete for that job what kind of policies might the five-star movement be able to put in place to ensure that really happens because for example I told about the competitiveness of Italian businesses we are for example some internal problems that don't give the possibility to an enterprise to stay in Italy to develop in Italy even caused by a European framework that sees a different for example a fiscal pressure but in the meantime the same the unique money that is a euro and doesn't give the possibility for a nation to to to have the her own money and to give her businesses a framework of international competitive so these are some problems that are not they don't Italian politicians and the governments don't don't pay attention to this problem but other kind very far from these issues. So is some of the new policy framework that you're looking at around this group the idea of more support for native industry, for more support for Italian industry as you said and for Finnish industry, for Swiss industry for British industry to the extent of excluding others preferential treatment, are you looking at the idea of building some trade barriers to protect what's yours or potentially taking advantage of the arrangements you have to equip people to find work within a bigger economic unit I mean that bigger economy for Switzerland is Switzerland, if you're in a canton of Geneva there's nothing to stop you moving to Zurich in Finland as part of the EU, there's nothing to stop young people moving to jobs in northern Italy so which way are you guys coming down? Are you seeing that there needs to be more protection internally within the EU for your nation states or that you need to take more advantage of the opportunity you've got? The main thing is that the game is fair and I believe that Finnish innovations, Finnish workforce is ready, willing and able to compete in the global market if the rules are same to everybody as Finns we produce 60% of the icebreakers in the world and all the good ones but we cannot go anywhere We shall need icebreakers also in the future but if there is a protectionist approach for somewhere we couldn't sell that particularly very good product because of that I'm self confident that we Finns can deliver and that is for sure and then of course if we made some decisions for political reasons for example in European Union like agriculture it has some special history and also in the future it would be of course easier and cheaper to buy it abroad but then what if the crisis come where do you buy it then and there should be this kind of elements also to protect in some sense that I can understand but in big picture I'm self confident that we can deliver but the rules must be obeyed and that is the problem in European Union the bailout policies and then if there is a burden sharing in immigration half of the countries don't deliver anything else it cannot be so that if you are rule based rule of law country and you do what is agreed to you cannot suffer from that Switzerland is a very competitive very successful economy it always comes up top in the World Economic Forum rankings but we talk about level playing fields for things as a small country sometimes difficult to make that playing field level football the Swiss football team which is a very worthy team sometimes needs people from outside Switzerland to help it compete on global I mean I sense in your question intellectually not really thought through prejudice which seems to say Switzerland is against foreigners which of course Adrian is utter rubbish not at all Switzerland is the country with the highest immigration rate per capita the last 15 years higher than the United States of America higher than Great Britain etc but it was actually the question about being a small country in a world of bigger powers and how do you win this is our way of survival Switzerland is probably the most successful survival organization of the last 700 years I mean we were always a small conglomerate of highly individualistic people and cantons it took hundreds of years to build a state and this feeling of David versus Goliath has always been at the core of our system and what is the recipe of Switzerland we said we have to create a government a political environment which enables us to create wealth because we have no natural resources we have nothing and therefore we tried to say liberty self reliance we decide on our own country we don't let Brussels or Habsburg or Paris decide on our fate we want our country to be vulnerable that means we have to be independent and we have to be open to the world and now the big confusion starts and one remark I want to address you said is why are the young people for example from Italy not going to Finland or whatever and there is one of the great institutional flaws of the European Union the European Union is not a federal state it's something in between and the free movement of people you only have within a state within the United States of America within Finland you don't have it across borders and why do the people don't move you have no free movement of people and the welfare state you cannot have both and this is the great intellectual error also of the left parties they think you can have a free movement of people across borders and the welfare state and this doesn't work together and we see it in Switzerland now we had a huge immigration and a rising joblessness among foreigners who are somehow migrating in our welfare state and the people don't want it they want migration but not into the welfare system into our labour market high qualified but we don't want people who just come in lose their job and this is our very highly developed welfare system that was a great promo for Switzerland as well I should say I feel extremely welcome as a Brit in Switzerland absolutely 25% German nobody's perfect and I want to add that one of my main takeaways has been a new respect for punctuality and I realise we've come to the end of our hour with all of our panellists on behalf of all of you and for being so frank and candid about the problems they face and the things they see on the horizon so please give them all a round of applause thank you