 Well, thank you very much indeed, Minister. Just before we kick off the question and answer session just to say that this session is taking place on the record and regards questions, if you could just identify yourself, say who you are and your institutional affiliation. So we've got about 35 minutes or so, but sort of more than that. Would anybody like to ask the first question? Yes. Honour daily member of the Institute. Thank you for visiting us. My question is about Bulgaria's relationship with Russia. Last week Vladimir Putin met with Bundeskanzler Angela Merkel and it appears that she is trying to put relations between the European Union in a broader sense back on track with Russia. Do you have any comment? I know that Bulgaria has very close cultural ties with Russia. How Bulgaria sees the ideal development of foreign common European policy as regards Russia? Yes. I feel comfortable. This question really comes right on time because today exactly our president is in Russia meeting President Putin. Yesterday he met Prime Minister Medvedev and today they are meeting the president of the Russian Federation. It is a real topical question, so thank you for this. There are a lot of speculations very often about our relationship with Russia, but I think we were always a country that followed exactly the common foreign security policy as far as Russia has been concerned. And if someone can find even a case where Bulgaria was outside of this policy as government, as official establishment, if I may say so, please ask me a question again. But I think, yes, we were absolutely following these five guiding principles of the relationship with Russia, which include of course the fulfillment of the so-called Minsk Agreement, which is part of the relationship as far as Ukraine is concerned and the issues that concern the security in and around Ukraine. It's always a very important issue. It's important issue to us even more than to others because we are very close. We are neighbors in the Black Sea. We are neighbors with both countries. And also Crimea is in the Black Sea, everyone knows that. But we are absolutely following the common European policy on these issues. And here we have sanctions and these sanctions will stay until we have progress on the Minsk Agreement. So there is no exception to this rule for us. Of course the five guiding principles include also to have a relationship with Russia on many other issues and to keep it also with the civil society. So we think it's important to keep all the channels of communication open. And that is why we have a certain relationship, which is not more intensive than of others. I think this visit comes of our president to Moscow after a long post of high-level visits between the two countries. And it's also part of the general, I would say, chill in this relationship between the European Union countries and Russia. And what we see that is positive and important to keep is that this country will stay. It is not going to go anywhere. We have to have really some certain relationship, very pragmatic relationship with Russia, which is to know that she meant to the general policy that we have with Russia, as I mentioned. But we also have strong cultural ties with this country between the two peoples. And it is not possible just to interrupt all the relationship. Besides, we have also important energy relations with this country. And like many in Eastern Europe, we were having a lot of our gas and other energy sources brought by Russia actually to this part of Europe. So we cannot interrupt everything like just in one moment, from another moment. We need to do a lot more to diversify, which is also our policy on energy issues. But still we think it is important to keep good relationship and to try to make them even better whenever it is possible. Of course, not to the expense of breaching sanctions. Here we are also very strict in implementing whatever it takes because we also suffer a lot as far as our agricultural products are concerned, as far as some products of this defence industry are concerned also. But that is why we very much rely upon the development of this new, as I mentioned, new and very important policy of the European Union in common defence. And also developing this new regulation, which is still under question mark, but we are doing our best to bring it to fruition. It is the regulation to create a common industrial programme financed by the European Union to develop together our industries and connect them even better in the European Union. Speaking about Russia, this is our view from this corner of Europe. It is very pro-European, I would say. Thank you very much indeed, Minister. May I just ask you a question about last week's summit meeting? Many people looking at the communique said that it was disappointing compared to the communique coming out of Thessaloniki 15 years ago. And that in some ways it represented a backward step for the Western Balkans. And I just want to ask you how you anticipate everything is going to go between now and the European Council in June. And whether the European Council is going to follow up on the commission's recommendation that Albania, for example in Macedonia, status will be upgraded. And whether we're going to see momentum, because I think the worrying thing for many people is not only that Germany is much more reluctant to embrace enlargement than it was 15 years ago, but also President Macron in Sofia. The language that he used for many people suggested that he wasn't particularly enthusiastic about the Western Balkans either. So I just wonder about the impressions that you took away from the summit meeting. And given the enormous effort that Bulgaria has put into injecting momentum into enlargement, are we going to get a positive outcome at the summit meeting in June? And what would that positive outcome look like from your perspective? Thank you very much. It is a very important question in the recent weeks that we were dealing with, and not only weeks. I started myself to work for the success of this meeting as of first meetings I was political director of my ministry before being upgraded to this post. And in February last year, in 2017, I actually have made certain meetings in the commission and in other European institutions, starting talking about organizing such a summit meeting in Sofia during our presidency, and trying again to, not probably again, but after so many years to bring back the focus of the attention of European countries and institutions towards this region of the West, so-called Western Balkans. I think at the very beginning it was really very difficult. Nobody wanted to listen. Everyone was saying, no, there are so many and so influential countries in the European Union that are absolutely against. And it's better that you just quit and you don't deal with this issue at all because nobody will want to come to Sofia and start talking about these countries. So the skepticism was really strong and it was really hard to start persuading people that it's really important to do something. And besides, there is the enlarging process which has its very well-established channels to develop. So it was easy to say there is a process so you can leave the things as they are and just quit this issue and find another better subject to deal with. But we decided to continue and we think that it is a very important issue, a very important part of our own national foreign policy and perception for the world. That we think that we can have better security and stability in the whole Europe, in the whole corner of the world. There only through European perspective and European path for all these countries that are situated there because we are really sure we know that they are just European countries and they should have this perspective open. So we started to work a lot and to work on all different levels that were possible with many countries, especially in Brussels, which is of course everything is concentrated there. And I think at least we managed to have everyone on board. And finally, it was a great success, the very summit itself that happened in Sofia because we have seen everyone there on board with one exception. We know why, but I don't want to mention different countries, but it was really very well-motivated and there was a good meeting the evening before. So we know that there was a support also for general support for enlargement and for even stronger than some other countries that participated. But in any case, yes, if you read the text, it is not so impressive, it's true, but it is still a text that was adopted by all 28 countries, 28 member states. And all the six Western Balkans are aligned to this text. It wasn't possible that because of the non-recognisers, of course, to have them all agree together or sign it in a form. You never sign actually political statements, but usually don't sign, but in this case it was really I think a success after we should not be maximalistic. We know that diplomacy is not the skill to have a maximum result, but it is also something that is about the possibility that exists. So what is possible and what is really desirable. And I think we have managed in these circumstances to reach the maximum. It is up to others to decide and to judge, but I think it was really a good result that we were having. Also we have this annex to this declaration, which is so-called Sofia positive agenda for the Western Balkans. And it is about very specific projects and they concern connectivity mainly. All these different types of connectivity, which is in the modern era not only transport, not only energy, but also digital connectivity. In many ways human relationship and also connectivity in education and the possibilities for all these countries to benefit from the possibilities that exist also in the European Union. And I think it also helps a lot to confirm the European perspective and to see whatever is possible to be done from our side. And now it comes their time to show up what is possible from their side to be done also to persuade all these very skeptical countries, some of them, to really open this perspective even wider. So I think it is really a very, very important summit. We cannot compare moments in time. It was 2003 in Thessaloniki, the previous one. And at that time even Kosovo was not on the map of Europe. And there were also other things that were not existing. For example, Montenegro, which gained independence in 2006. So there were a lot of changes that we lived through all these years. But still this is the main message. We very often say that it is also a Balkan presidency because we were supported by other countries from the region like Greece and Romania. And Romania hold on a non-recognizer. Their president participated in the summit and it was a gesture towards the Bulgarian presidency. He might have refused, actually, with the full right. I mean, as a lawyer or ambassador they confirmed that they are not obliged at all to take part in this. But they came and even participated in the family photo, which was another big issue for some countries. So I think it was the possible and very positive outcome. And I think it was good that we have managed to have it. I think also that the strategy of the European Commission adopted on the 6th of February was also part of this joint effort, which was very well understood by many in Brussels, also in the institutions. People in Virginia, which is dealing with enlargement, they know actually very well what is happening on the ground. And I think they were really assessing positively this effort and trying to somehow to respond to this policy and to be really in fine tuning with the Bulgarian presidency and what were our vision for this. And about the joint enlargement conclusions, we are really hopeful that we will be in a position to have this time after 18 months joint conclusions with the participation of everyone else on board. And there might be certain exceptions, but this time we try to do our best and have this type of conclusion that will fulfill the national positions of everyone. We will see it is not an easy task, I have to admit, but we will do our best. We still have several weeks in front of us. Further questions? Jill. Thank you very much for a very interesting presentation. I just wondered, could you elaborate a little bit just on the W regulation? That's quite an interest to my audience and it is contested. The second thing I just wanted to ask you was you said that it was more important to get agreement on the priorities before we started hiding in the other back negotiations about budgetary contributions. I just wondered to what extent is there now convergence or consensus around the priorities. Thank you for this question. They are very difficult, but very interesting. I mentioned in our previous talk, the Dublin regulation, it has the name of this beautiful city of course, although I think we are together with Ireland on this issue. Here we were trying to have a balanced approach and have again on board both sides in the European Union, which are now more or less in diverging positions about, as I mentioned, solidarity and responsibility. Here we have, to a certain extent, confronting views of countries that are at the border of the European Union and are confronted directly with the first wave of migration that comes sometimes illegally and sometimes we have, of course, sometimes refugees. And we have the countries that are the final destination of certain of these people, of some of these people. And we have also others who just would like to have national approach and control of their own borders without taking any kind of solidarity responsibility here in solidarity. And we will try to find our best way to fulfil, to a certain extent, and find the right balance between these diverging positions. I don't think it will be easy and we might need the help of the institutions in a certain moment in time from here up to the end of June, but still we think it's possible. It depends on the will of the different countries that are involved in this, the main proponents of the two main opinions in the European Union. What I can just, I cannot get into details because we don't have time, and they are, of course, a bit insiders in it. But I think it is possible to have, to reach consensus before the end of our presidency. And it is important, of course, to take everyone on board, as I said, because we can understand that also the countries of final destination are having a lot of burden on their economies, their national budgets, so it is absolutely understandable to us. From another point of view, here we have also the views of the so-called frontline countries, especially the countries that are bordering the sea, which is very difficult to defend and to have control of these sea borders. And everyone should take its own part of the burden we think and find the best solution. So I can just say this, only this. And about the not-annual financial framework, I think the discussion just started because the project has been presented on the 5th of May, the first one. So there was only one general discussion up to now at the last general fairscast. It just started. The different views are in the process of formation. Of course, everyone has its own views and considerations. For us, it's very important for Bulgaria, probably also for Ireland too, to keep certain parts of the policies that existed for several years or many years for some of the countries. For example, we are absolutely a problem of the cohesion policy, and I think it will be our priority to keep the cohesion policy and convergence policy because we think it's really what it is about the European Union. It is about having a stronger union incorporating each and every member state in it with the possibility to develop further and better and to make it stronger also on the European and international scale. And after Brexit especially, we have to find also the right balance between countries that benefit from the budget, the cohesion funds and countries that are net contributors. But I think there are certain policies that are really important for the welfare of our citizens and for the idea that we have to bring the European Union close to its citizens. Without these policies, it will be really difficult to do it. But of course there is an important issue added to that because the new policies that we have agreed to apply as far as the next framework is concerned. So we have again to find the right balance between these two options, and we cannot have... We can have better, of course, restructured policy. We can have better spending and we can have also find better ways for greater income to the European Union. We still have to think that we pay only 1% of what it is now, 1% of our GDP each and every country. So sometimes it is a bit exaggerated in certain sense but it's really very important to keep these policies. That's what I can add to this. Perhaps I could just follow up Jill's question on the budget by asking what is the Bulgarian view about this attempt to link future budgetary entitlement, structural funds and so on, to rule of law. This is a reason of course because of what's happened in Poland and in Hungary. What is the Bulgarian perspective on this? Are you in favour of establishing a linkage and how might that actually work in the future? Well, that's another very important issue. We think it is... Rule of law is something that we cannot debate. I mean, it's an overarching principle of the European Union. We have to follow it with all possible means. But when we establish a link between these two, we should think also that there should be an institution who will say finally that the rule of law here and there is in breach. We have to be very careful in this. For the moment in this presidency we try to be really very careful on pronouncing this and that on this issue because we have to see how the issue will develop in the several months. As a country that still has our mechanism for cooperation and monitoring, it is important for us to know what will be the criteria and who will be the judge finally to say what is happening here and there. We know how difficult is the debate, for example, when we speak about Poland reforms of the judicial system and this activation of Article 7. So we would like to have a very careful and balanced approach on this issue. Yeah. Further questions? Yes. I will have two questions. First is, is there any prospect that the Macedonian name issue will be resolved before the next EU summit? There are some rumours about progress. Second question, the whole of the new context has been discussed how to face a more assertive Turkey and where they are as a name of Turkey what is your impression of what will develop? So thank you for these questions. They are really part of, in the heart of our national foreign policy also and they are really crucial for the region, for Southeast Europe but also obviously they are very important and give repercussions to the whole European Union policy and sometimes especially the issue of Turkey is really important for the general security in this part of the world. I think before the end of the week we will see what will happen with this issue, with the name issue, so-called name issue, the debate between our two neighbours because there will be another meeting in New York these days between the two foreign ministers, perhaps with the participation of the UN messenger Metunimid. So we are really in the days and hours of these talks there were also talks in Sofia between the two prime ministers during the summit meeting last week they were talking even during the night I understood I wasn't there of course but what we have heard was really good news that they are very close to solution still having a role in front of them but close to solution much more closer than ever happened before so we will see we are just in a position of witnessing what is happening in this issue and trying to be the best facilitator as possible as a neighbouring country, as a country with history and certain legacy and part of our national history is also connected to this issue it is really very very important to us what we will get out of this finally but the many thing is really the two countries to find the best solution of this name issue which concerns also other things part of this we would be a name valid for each and every use or we would be just a kind of national name and inside they will keep the Republic of Macedonia we will see I don't think it is a possibility at all actually for Greece to accept this solution which is not valid for each and every usage but still we are in a process and here we are also very carefully watching what is happening and there was recently a name that was mentioned by the two sides by the Prime Minister of one of the country and the other was responding and the whole opposition was involved so we see how difficult it might be but finally they might find the best name for both of them we will see it is really directly linked to the progress on the enlargement process we know that it is a precondition for the the commission has already of course recommended in its report that negotiations be open with Albania and former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia but still we expect to see how the countries the member states will react and what will be their conclusion at the end of June and in the meantime we need to have this solution on this issue of course so I cannot prejudge but we are in a good hands both countries have the best negotiators now both foreign ministers seems very well prepared and very positive to find the solution and I know from both of them that they really want to have a solution of course they have their own domestic political public all these issues that might be involved and about Turkey about Turkey I would say that how do we see getting out of what is happening there first of all we have to see what will happen on the 24th of June we expect to see the national elections in Turkey and how they will develop and what will be the results which kind of government they will produce and the implementation of the constitutional changes that have been voted I would say democratically voted in Turkey in the referendum so we will see I think it is important also with this country to have also this so-called channels of communications open and not to close the door just because it's an Islamic country or a Muslim country, better said not Islamic but hopefully to stay just Muslim country and we will see it is important to keep and we think Turkey in a negotiation track although negotiations are frozen but what is the other perspective that we have and what are the other means that we have to deal and of course we have also Turkey not only this but a key country to confront with this illegal migration coming in big waves to the whole European continent one of the ways of course coming they keep 3,500,000 of refugees of migrants in their country and I imagine what could happen if they are not strong enough to keep them so we are also working on this so-called mechanism of financing these refugees and migrants in Turkey with the European Union budget so that is what I can say for now I mean I just ask you a question about the euro and it's a very simple one will Bulgaria join the eurozone in the near future you mentioned ERM2 for example a little bit earlier the left has been one of the most stable currencies in Europe for the last 20 years or so a little bit less the Bulgarian economy is doing very well growing very strongly so do you see a point in the near future where Bulgaria would join the eurozone well of course we see a point that we joined the euro I cannot name a year or a moment exactly in time but I think we are determined to do it determined to do whatever is needed to do it and the reaction that we received was positive from Commissioner Mosco we see for example he said yes of course Bulgaria is eligible and ready according to certain benchmarks but still it needs to do certain things to bring its budget probably GDP to better numbers and also to work a lot on other certain specific issues but probably to join the ERM we are ready to do it even now if the eurozone minister decides so I think we will be there it's part of our vision for the future of Europe we should be in the core of part of Europe because it is in our interest I think it's also to the interest of all others to be there together ok are there any further questions ok I think we may draw the session to a close and just before we conclude I'd like to thank the minister for that very comprehensive view of the Bulgarian presidency Bulgaria's attitude to European integration and to thank you also many of us in this room are very aware of the great support Bulgaria has offered Ireland on the Brexit negotiations and that's very much appreciated so thank you very much thank you very much also to Ambassador Simon for the support that he has given the institute in putting this event together thank you very much indeed so we will conclude with the appropriate applause for the minister so thank you very much