 I think that we've got to be aware of the fact that there is a change taking place. It's taking place in Europe. What was a different political situation from one country to another is becoming a European white situation. We citizens are much more interested than in the past to what is happening in other European countries. And we know that what is happening politically in one country can have an effect on other countries, particularly four months before the European elections. Yes, but the European elections are a bit of a catalyst of this attention, but changes are taking place among citizens in our public opinion. So politics follow, or rather politics take into account the fact that citizens aren't only interested in domestic policies, but they also want to take place in other countries. Luigi Demayo and Mr Salvini, are they in power? You who are a moderate, you are closer to Mario Monti. How do you get your voice heard? Well, you know that the two ministers are also the two leaders of the political parties that have a majority in Italy, and democratically they exercise the political power that has been given to them by the citizens. As I have said, I am not the only independent member in the government. The government is an interesting balance between members of the two parties, and there are a few ministers who are independent. There is also a certain amount of dialectics going on, and what we're trying to do is to try and find the best results. Well, is it you who tries to reach a consensus? It's not always me, but there is another element which is connected to what I was saying earlier on, namely that it is very difficult today at the European level to speak of a traditional foreign policy. I think it is quite normal that each minister has a European vision of things, and at the European level we are obviously discussing certain things which at domestic level are entrusted to ministers other than the minister of the foreign affairs. Well, why is there a conflict being created between Italy and France by your minister? Well, in a democratic policy debate, I don't think criticism is negative. The fact that there is an open discussion, well, it's not a discussion quite often. They have called in the Italian ambassador to Paris to complain. Yes, that is part of the traditional way in the diplomatic circle, but they have to adapt to the new reality. But the new reality in my view is that there is a political arena in Europe. There is a political space which is reflected in the perspective for the election, for better or worse. Well, we have to see. Political dialectics have become very difficult at the domestic, national, local level, at the regional level. So political dialectics can be very hard, irrespective of the foreign, but when we are at the European level we are less well prepared because we always look at things from a perspective between two different countries, but within the European Union the fact that we are united, we speak much more openly and perhaps without masking our real feelings. There are divisions in all political competitions. Do you feel responsible? You were part of Marie Monti's government. Do you feel responsible for the rise of populism in Italy? Do you feel that this mistrust vis-à-vis the political class, even though you are an independent, but the populism that we see in Italy, is that the result of that? Well, I think that in Italy, particularly the results of the elections that took place in March 2018, but in all the other countries, what we have seen, new political forces emerging, where political forces which were more marginal have emerged. And that is perhaps the fruit. You can call them populist, although personally I don't think that is a very precise definition, but the fact that they are different political forces with different political forces compared to the political parties of the past, is the result of a certain number of things which haven't been properly handled, either at the national or the European level. Two examples of that. On the one hand, you've got the financial economic crisis, which has really had a terrible devastating effect in Europe. We've dealt with it to a certain extent. We could have gone faster. But I think that citizens really thought that we were going to go faster and that we didn't really have the right solutions for financial solutions. And then there is the crisis on the migration front. And there was a lot of problems with this, not only at the European level, but within countries. And that has led a lot of citizens to look at other political parties with a different message, do you deploy that? Well, it depends. It depends on how those political forces are going to contribute to the political discussion in the country. But you could be in a minority in Formanstam. Well, we have to see what's going to happen at the European elections. Well, that's going to be interesting for the very first time. We're going to see real political elections. I think that citizens in the European Union, we realize for the first time, it's not just a repeat of the political balances in Europe. It will be real political elections, which could change the face of things. And I think that you've got different visions of Europe, which will be in competition. Mrs. Mastam, you represent the European Commission. No, it is the European state. It is the parliament. We propose, we're not, we're not the legislator. Well, we say the legislator. Well, you adopt laws. Now, Brussels is the enemy of the populace. Even in France, during the Gilets jaunes, up evils, I think that everybody thinks that there is no progress in Europe. Do you feel a response or when people trample on the European flag? No, I think you've got to see things clear. Yes, there is this movement of the Gilets jaunes, the Yellow Vests, the High Visibility Vests, you've got the populace, the nationalists, you've got the anti-immigration forces in Europe. And we'll see what this is going to lead to. And I'm frightened about this. Yes, you're frightened. Yes, let me finish though. There is another movement which isn't that. If you look at the opinion polls in all the European countries, support for the European Union and European corporation is at its highest level in 10 years, with the exception of... It is. No, it seems that populace have the wind in their sails. Yes, they have the wind in their sails, but they're still in my nority. If you look at the opinion polls, which I carried out over the last 20 years in the same way, the same number of respondents, and we see that support for the EU is very strong, and particularly amongst young people. Yes, amongst young people. And that means that everything is fine and dandy. No, there are lots of problems. The notion that all Europe is against the EU is wrong. Well, why is there so much hatred? Do you ask yourself that question? Why such hatred? Yes, of course, I ask myself that question. I cannot explain that easily in two minutes. I think the minister spoke about the economic crisis. Of course, that has created an enormous amount of ill feeling. There's social problems, political problems in all the countries, particularly in those countries that have been most affected. And a lot of politicians have used that fear, that situation which people are confronted with, in order to say, well, I've got an easy solution for you. And there are no easy solutions. The populace have used that, they've leveraged that. The minister also mentioned another aspect, namely that there is a problem in the countries to take joint responsibility for the migratory flows. Is it a failure? Of course, it is a failure. But it's a failure by the member states why we are 27 countries amongst the richest in the world. We could take responsibility to welcome refugees that really need protection. We could do that together. And we could also fight to ensure that we protect our borders in a trusting manner. But we've got to take that responsibility together. The fact that certain countries refuse, the Vizigrad country is hungry is a case in point. Yes, these countries sent to refugees to my country, to your country, they sent refugees 40 years ago. This is a situation which hasn't led to a lot of trust. But let me repeat, there is this situation, then there is Brexit, but there is a European Union. And in this particular period, what we have seen is that countries have had a possibility to strengthen and deepen European cooperation by taking measures in the field of defence, in the social sphere, also on digital developments. We won't be able to do this also in the field of defence. We can't just talk about the Gilles Jornin. You know, there are also marches of young people, thousands of young people who are demonstrating for a more responsible climate policy. The fact that power has slipped away from national parliaments. Isn't that the fact that there are too many standards and regulations? But if you look at the thousand people in the streets in Poland and Hungary who go and demonstrate with the European flag against their government, is that a resistance? There are thousands of them. They are against their government. They are in favour of Europe. Mr Bouba, you are the head of a big French group, Axe Insurance. Let me ask you, a corporation treaty in Aachen, signed between France and Germany, signed a few days ago. And it led to fake news. How is it possible at a time of your initial take place? I think that this Aachen treaty is a very positive development. Why? Because it strengthens the importance of the Franco-German Axis. Of course, there are always people who try to produce fake news about the contract or the compact. But I think it is very good that the two key nations in Europe come together on behalf of Europe. But some say it's an act of betrayal. Betrayal vis-à-vis whom? No, there is no act of betrayal. Is there a lack of explanations when there is a treaty that is set up between France and Germany? Perhaps there is a lack of educational process. I mean, why do people think that this is something negative, this treaty? I think that Europe is taken as something we take for granted. If you talk to young people, well, they say, well, I've always lived in Europe. That is my day-to-day life. They don't understand the security issues. They don't understand the issue of peace. And I think that we've got to make people aware of what we have achieved. And that people have also lost a connection between the people. Now, the Chileans are not against Europe. Some of them are trampling the European flag under foot. Now, I've been on these roundabouts. They're not radical people, they're people like you and me. People who are often in single-parent households. And what they're telling you is I don't like France anymore. They say very often, I am all alone. Nobody speaks to me. I can no longer express my views. And I think that you've got to re-establish a connection with people. And you've got to go towards people. And that is why I think it is important to understand that it's depressing what is happening in Europe. But at the same time, it's good because people are expressing their views. It is also an opportunity to take their input. But how do we reconnect with people? I think we need to discuss what is lacking today is a dialogue. If I look in my own industry, yes, we are doing pretty well in Europe. But there are some times that we are outside reality, even in my own industry, in my own sector. We've got to go to people. We've got to talk to them and bring them on board. I think we do the same thing in a company. I'm not the best strategist, but I am the person who facilitates the dialogue between people. And you've got to do the same thing at the political level. Timothy Snyder, as an American intellectual, what do you think about what is happening in Europe? You say that history doesn't repeat itself. It is something that is taught. Now, you can, of course, draw negative conclusions. You can see that it is the effect of globalization. You can also take the lessons of the 1920s and 30s. I think, of course, that we're populists. They're also populists in the United States, in my country, but also in Europe. And they have drawn some lessons from the period I've referred to. I think globalization is a fact and you've got to make certain choices so that globalization can continue. And those are choices which concern technology, equality, etc. These are the lessons that we can draw from the past. Is it not too late? I think that what history teaches us is that it's never too late. It is never too late. Tomorrow will come in the past and released in the future. There are certain things which we won't reproduce. I think that history is greater than our imagination. What is going to happen is not what we are predicting is going to happen. But it's not too late. And I think that now it is very good that the Americans and the Europeans have a challenge to face. It is not true that democracy and globalization don't need to have something to help them. Historically speaking, what they need is to have boldness, boldness at the political level. Well, we'll come back to that idea later on. So this is the end of the first part of this special Davos dialogue. Welcome to the second part of our special discussion on the European elections and the rise of populism. What can we expect of the elections on 26th of May next? At the time of Brexit, can we give a taste of Europe back to the people? Mr. Snyder, we finished off with you in the first part. You were talking about the fact that we lack boldness or courage. Yes. I think that that's a problem with the populists. We see or we think that the populists are brave or courageous in coming up with new ideas. But if we think about the future, we've got to think about how we want to shape the future. And that is precisely where we see a problem with populism. And it's something that affects us all. We're all on the defensive. We resist. But we don't have people thinking about the future. And that is paradoxical because it is in the future that Europe will have to become or could become a power because environmental problems, the problem with a black hole of taxes, monopolies, human rights at the time of digitisation. It is only Europe that has the power to become a power. What do you mean by that? I think that China is looking to the future and it's manipulating things. The United States aren't looking at the future, but they're very short-termists. They look at the present. Is that what you mean? I think that that is the right short-termist. But I think it's only Europe that has started to address the issues of our century. That is a problem of young people, human rights and the environment. These are issues that interest young people and it's only Europe that can do something. So you've got to give prospects to people. But you've got to have a vision, not an American perspective, not an anti-Chinese perspective. But you've got to have a vision for Europe which is the only power which can really meet the challenges. The only power that can stand up to the United States and China, is that how you see Europe today? Not in the meaning that you've got to criticise the Americans or the Chinese all the time. No, but I think that in a globalised world we all have to face the same problems. The Chinese have already made certain choices. The Americans aren't capable of making any choices at the moment. But in Europe you have perhaps the only institution that has really understood, at least passively, what are the real challenges and which have the instruments to deal with them. And that is precisely why Europe has so many enemies. But Europe is very divided today. It should come together around the ideas you're talking about, around these challenges. What do you mean by that? I said that Europe today is very divided. But that is normal. That is a bit of a syndrome. You always talk about the divisions. Brexit. Brexit is a case in point. It's stupid, it's a disaster, but at the same time it is an example of European processes. Now we've had two years of negotiations, two years of discussion and now nothing is being done. And that's perhaps good compared with the Americans. It's very good. Why is it good? I don't think that there will be a Brexit, quite honestly. But I think it is, I think that the divisions in Europe are real. They exist. But at the same time it's normal, it's natural that there should be divisions. And you can live with those divisions if you understand that it is only in a large institution that we are able to talk to the Americans and the Chinese. And in a globalised world that is important. I think what you just said shows exactly the depth of this political change that is taking place in Europe. It shows that there are great differences in Europe and there are great changes going on at the moment. So, what we're trying to do is seek certain alliances, even where there are no natural alliances. And we're not... You have different parties in different European countries which might be seen as socialist or which might be seen as populist. Now, we don't often realise that they are linked between themselves. If we look at the political forces today we can see what kind of links there might be. So, you're saying there are links between these different groups? Yes, where there are and there aren't. If we're one, they are linked when you look at those who are most critical of Europe. But if you look in specific terms though, if you look at these international struts there are some differences of course. But we will see what comes of this. We still have a number of months so as to consider it. We can look at this and see what happens in day-to-day politics and we'll see what comes of the elections. So, you're saying that you're in favour of these populist movements? Well, I think it's part of this Europe, really. It's part of political Europe, really. Europe, which doesn't really have any traditional borders anymore. And I think that what we have to try and do here... The real question is this. There may well be different alliances. Different ways they were in the past when we come to the elections. But citizens will then vote and we'll get the results of that. Now, depending on those results, the European Parliament, you will then get majorities being formed. Now, we know that the European Parliament, the majorities, might be different to what you get at national parliaments. It might not be as strong as... But it might this time be a little bit more clear-cut. As I read it up to now, there's always been a majority. And then there was a kind of majority, even if it wasn't explicit. And if it didn't rank to the majority, and then you had certain minorities. But this time, you could have a majority and a clear... And then a minority, which for the first time would be a kind of opposition of the European Parliament. It is once the vote has been taken in May, whether the European Parliament is prepared to work with the majority and with an opposition. The proof of that would be the appointment of the next president of the commission and the appointment of commissioners. Now, this is unknown territory, really. And that is going to be the real test here. That'll be the real proof positive of what we're just thinking about at the moment. So Europe, then... Has it protected those who've lost from globalization? No, it hasn't. And I think that explains a lot of these movements that we now see here. Because coming back to the economic crisis, where a lot of people lost their houses, their jobs, and even their hopes, particularly younger people, because we have a high youth unemployment in many countries still, but member states didn't have the strength, the will, or the ability to protect people sufficiently. So what about the social side of Europe, though? Is that where the challenge is? Well, the responsibility with member states is up to them to protect their citizens and they haven't made the necessary reforms to slice up the cake of globalization because if it works well, it's good. They haven't reformed their system, their social systems, the tax redistribution. They haven't invested in skill, acquisition and education that the people need so that people could move to different places. And what Europe has done recently, and this wasn't possible a few years ago, we've tried to develop a social agenda because Europe's not just economics, it's also the social side. So what is that agenda, though? We don't actually see it. You say there are things happening in different countries and there are differences between countries. Well, there are certain limits to what could be done because social Europe is how you distribute wealth to some extent and there's no legal power of the Commission to do that. That's a national competition, competence. So what we can do is set certain standards, do some benchmarking to actually set certain targets that everyone should try and move towards and that could be a minimum. But this is controversial though because who is going to fund the social? It's funded from taxation and that we don't have European taxation. So therefore, the real responsibility here lies with member states and they're not doing enough. Would you be in favour of European tax for social purposes? Well, I'm a wee bit sceptical about it. I think this would be in a very different Europe. But it's something that can be discussed in coming years. I think it's good. There is so much division at the moment within Europe. So I think this is something that we could look at. We could talk about social tax and so defences and there might be one way to do things. And it's up to citizens to decide because for the first time, and I think, Mrs. Wright, we can mobilise young people because there are a lot of things at which are at stake at the moment. We're talking about European values. But it's not just the economy, it's the value. These values, yes. And this might be this final commission, the last commission that is made up of people who believe in Europe. It might be the last commission that really is made up of people who believe in Europe. Are you worried about that? Yes, I'm very worried because there are very strong movements. There are European movements who are against foreigners and they're going to use foreigners to fight against foreigners. And we see this with the mobilisation of populists and the anti-immigration parties. And that bothers me, worries me because they're against Europe. And if they have someone who's appointed to the commission, then you might have people within the European Commission who don't see Europe as it's been traditionally seen and that doesn't worry me. Thomas Bouboul, now there is a growing euro-cepticism and Oxfam says that this is getting worse. And what should be done, what should be set up in France? I mean, you were asked by Mr Macron this, what did you say to Macron when he asked you what should be done in France? We have different responsibilities today. You look at governments and they have to do more on the social side. But if you take the French system, which is one of the most developed in terms of redistribution of wealth, then you do wonder why this is going on in France. And you can't just look to the government these days. You also have to bring in companies as well, they have to be part of that social commitment. What, are they doing enough? Well, this is what I said to Mrs Macron. We agreed with 13 companies and it was a six days and we did this digitally. We said that we would give specific commitments on training, on apprenticeships and also we, each company, is going to provide a service for the people who need it and that would be free of charge. And then we would do some tracking as to who's done what. And what we're trying to do is broaden that, but at the moment companies have to sign up to it. We can't just look to government to expect them to do that and leave them the responsibility. So, now I think one of the yellow vests thing, they wanted to say there should be more commitment from bigger companies and they're still expecting that. Yeah, I think we can say that that will come and it's a process because at the moment the system's moving, it's changing. At the moment we're in a society which is so divided, which is so fragmented and what we're doing is we're grasping what's happening if you're in Paris and now you're a little bit in the Paris bubble but what's really going on is going out on outside Paris. So, now we have to see how we can help the people who are in France and we have to look at the companies who are throughout France and they need to give a commitment and they have to provide services. Now on training, are you going to perhaps pay people a bit more? Are you going to reflect training in salary? Well, every company is discussing this and we have taken this opportunity to look at the situation and looking at bonuses and also looking at pay levels. Is that enough? It's never enough, but I think it's a good start. And I think they were expecting a strong gesture, I think, from the big companies in France, but we didn't really get that. So, there wasn't anything very strong from companies. Well, a financial gesture is a short-term thing. And it doesn't really deal with the medium term. We need a commitment from companies and the people who work for them. And this event here has certainly changed people's thinking and I've seen a lot of companies who have now said, okay, I now want to give a commitment and I want to help. Are you doing that? Yes, indeed. Yes, we've done this and this is nothing new about us. There are a lot of companies who have already done a great deal but perhaps it wasn't appreciated but it wasn't realized. But I think we have to do more. Mr. Tilly-Snyder, now we can see that Brexit, well, there's a real risk here. There could be some implosion within the United Kingdom and populists and you see them in Poland and in Hungary and the Uyghur group, which now have the same perceptions, the same values as Europe. And we call them illiberal democracies. So, the Europe of 1945, might that just explode or might it simply disappear? I think that you have to start by saying that these four countries are very different. Hungary defines itself as a liberal democracy but Slovakia, that would not be the case. Slovakia, now I don't know if you know this, but recently it's been an example of a very active society. They've been very anti-corruption and also the murder of a journalist and in Bratislava you can see that there are some very interesting things happening and very positive things happening. Now, turning to Poland, there are certain negative developments there but there have been elections and it was quite clear that there is a clear alternative. There is a feisty media and there's still a population which is very pro-European, but to answer your question, I think that the mistake made by some Hungarian and Polish politicians is to believe that they can use the European Union and also at the same time undermine its legitimacy. They're not going to do that. That's not going to be successful in the long term. Well, they seem to be doing well at the moment. Well, as I say, the risk is this. It's not... The Union is going to break down. I think the real danger is and seen from Budapest or Warsaw that there will be a different Europe where Germany is perhaps more powerful. We might be even talking about a two-speed at Europe here. Now, for Hungary and Poland, that would mean exclusion. There could be a different Europe, but it might be worse for the Hungarians and for the Poles and that's the risk for them. So, they have to realise then that that might be the worst possible solution for them. That's what you're saying. Mr. Enzo, Italy, I have to say this, is as seen as the weak link in Europe. Is it going to leave the Eurozone, do you think? No, I don't think so. This has been discussed a great deal when we had the last Italian budget. But it was a bit of a tussle with Brussels, wasn't it? But it was... That's allowed for in the rules, though. The rules set down certain parameters, but they do allow governments to propose their budget and national parliaments can decide whether they approve it or not. So, between the two, there is some discussion, of course, with the European Commission and with the Council of Ministers, which deals with finance and the economy. So, to make sure these national laws are exempt... So, you're saying this is a guarantee then, you're saying that it doesn't leave the Europe? Yes, I think it's two-way traffic here. I think that there's, for all countries who are part of this, it establishes a certain rules. It established a basic framework against a win and you have to deal with, act within that. Now, there are a number of responsibilities which remain at national level and at national level what's important is that this be done and exercised democratically. And to actually doesn't always do what you want it to do. Well, this worries the markets, there's a general concern in the European economy because of what's going on in Europe. Well, yes and no. We are worried about the slowdown in the big economies in Europe and certainly economies bigger than ours. No, but it's particularly Europe. I think Europe is having a downward pressure on the European economy. Well, look here, Europe though. If we're looking nationally, I think we certainly want to improve our economic performance. But if I look at this, wearing a European hat, I would say that after the financial crisis, there are other parts of the world looking at the United States of America, for example, which recovered much more quickly from the crisis and there are certain problems that they still have and they cope with this better than Europe. We didn't get out of it as well as the U.S.A. And why is that? This depends on them, that there is not sufficient consistency between various governments. One of the problems that we have in Europe, and this isn't just new, I mean, but I think we have certainly seen this in Europe because of what's going on politically, this mix of both competition and cooperation between economic players and member states and these constitutions, which are both at national and supernational levels, sometimes it works, but sometimes it doesn't work. And I think that's what we've seen now. So you're saying you've got the five star and you've got the Liga and they got the election in the elections and they were... So you've also got European legitimacy as well. So you've got competing legismacies. So I think this is going to be changed by the E.P. Parliament though. I think they'll help us bring these together and we'll see what those results bring. We'll see what happens in the various countries. Well, yes, that might help to emerge things that we might not be able to come up with a general conclusion to this though. This is Maestro. Do we have to look again at the powers of the European Union? Or might that be something that the incoming president has to deal with? Perhaps. I think that's the most important thing that we need to demobilise citizens in Europe for the elections. Of course we can always look at these things again, but I think for the moment what we're trying to do and what we have to continue to do is to wait for results because we want to see results and as Mr Schneider said, we have got climate change. We've got terrorism. Those are the big challenges. I'm sorry, compared to the new climate, we were further ahead five years ago than we are today. I think that no longer works. I think we were more progressive then than now. There are certain challenges in Europe. Sorry, could you please stop interrupting me? Could you please let me answer? No, I think you have to see the results and I would agree with you. Now, I think we could be more ambitious regarding climate change, but if you look at Europe as a whole, that's 28. Europe is 28, one plus one plus one. Now, perhaps we haven't done enough, perhaps, however, I think we can say that Katowice wouldn't have been as successful as it was without Europe. So, Europe of the 28th then has to try and make progress. The digital world, we've got trade. We're looking at the single market so that we can reform it. We have to look at social Europe. We have to look at investment into innovation. We have to look at small companies, education, training and so on. And we certainly have our projects on this. We're working in member states on this and I think we have to really focus on getting genuine results so that we can show citizens that we're listening to their concerns. So, how are you going to tell them that these are the results? How are you going to do that in just four months? Well, we're going to do what we can. All members of the commission are travelling at the moment, which is what we're already doing in fact. I think we're doing a lot of these kind of town hall meetings and we're doing that and we could do more. But I think we have to show leadership in all so that we can really mobilise here and so that we can try and show it's wrong to blame all bad things in the world on Brussels because that's not the way in which we're going to get the good decisions taken and we're going to get a proper vote. So, how can you give people a wish for it? Does it not seem as a wee bit bureaucratic? How can you give people a sort of... see it as a positive thing? No, it's not democratic. For example, we're working on anti-terrorism rule. That's not bureaucratic. And okay, perhaps you could say that the institution reform is a bit technocratic here. You asked whether this would be a job of the incoming president but we're doing some very specific stuff though. We listen to citizens, we dialogue and we bring them into our decisions. Well, how do you do that? I guess you do that at the European Parliament. Were the members of the European Parliament? And those of us standing for the elections, certainly. But we in the Commission within our limits, we do what we can. We do this every week, practically every day. But we have to mobilise the national ministers and the prime ministers for these European elections. Thomas Bubelle, now finally, you said that we need a third pathway. I mean, what would that be in Europe? And it's what the professors said. I think we have to look at what our differentiation is. Well, it's our values that different changes. And it's also our ability to set standards. And one of the things, I think, which was quite a bit, is the GPR. That is to say the data regulations. We were the first in Europe to do this. And I think for the next Commission, that's going to be very important to say, what are priorities? Clearly, climate change is one of them. And as I see it, the digital revolution, but not just we copy Google and Facebook. I think we have to come up with our own pathway and we do that based on our own strong points, transport, aviation and, thirdly, we have to see how we can reinvent the social contract because our values is and it's always been a very social one. I think that system is now come to the end of what it can do and we have to reinvent it. And I want that to happen because today we talk about China. We talk about the United States all the time, but we never talk about Europe. And for me, Brexit isn't the fact that it's there. I think that this is really damaging to Europe's reputation. And I think we have to look into the future so that we can reinvent Europe. We have to decide what our own pathway is and we have to have a specific project to do it. The twinning, Erasmus, that's all disappeared. And I think we have to wake that all up again. Well, thank you very much to Mabuba. And all of you, to all the speakers, thank you very much. Thank you to all of you as well, to having been with us in the French. And thank you very much. Please stay. We've now got 15 minutes for questions. Please, feel free. Yes, please. Can you hear me? I'm from Italy, from La Serra. So I have a question to the Italian minister, not because I'm in Italy, because there are two things. And we saw the Aachen summit. Now amongst those agreements is the agreement between France and Germany, that they would consult on all these matters before looking to other countries. What do you think about that? And perhaps I could say something else. You said that it's normal that there might be disagreements within political space. But Member States are doing quite a lot. Does this concern you? Does it worry you that there are certain problems created by the Italian government and that Italy is isolated, as was said by Commissioner Mastrom? Well, you've got a microphone. You can answer. Thank you. Now, following this question about how isolated Italy might be and whether it's isolated or not, now what really strikes me in all of this is that Europe and the European Union is now is like an archipelago of different islands really, rather being all together. So we see there's a certain group, we've got the Visigrad group, we've also got the Nordic or the Baltic group or whatever it's called. And there's the Mediterranean as well, where we should also have a group as well. So we don't want to let the others have one and we don't. And so we have a group. Now, basically, we don't have any particular access here. And now you could talk about the French-German access. And I think we have to put this into its proper context, rather than saying that the country is isolated. However, there is certainly a risk in Europe and that is that we might lose that ability to talk. And I think that's the most important thing. We have to be able to have dialogue, we have to be able to talk about things, even to disagree. And sometimes we have to perhaps be a little bit forthright in how we do that, as we've recently seen. But I think we have to be able to do that. We have to be able to disagree, to agree to disagree. And it's not by putting together agreements where you've got the different German ones, let's have another one with Italy in it or another one with Netherlands or whatever, or with Sweden and those countries we're representing today. I think that the most important thing is that we have to talk to each other and we have to keep that and safeguard that. And therefore, I think this discussion at the moment, even if it's so quite harsh, even if it doesn't seem to be respecting national. But I think there should be no-go areas, though, and I think we need to be able to do that in the European public space. We spoke about it in theoretical terms in the past, but it was Habermas who said that, wasn't it? And I think he was a very illustrious thinker. But I think this European space is something that's going to come about because of that. If you live in a block of flats, you have to discuss with the other residents. And I think you have to decide whether you're going to fix the roof or fix the heater. And therefore, it's important to do it that way. Thank you. Yes, you have the floor. Bonjour. I'm Global Shaper from France and Morocco. About 10 years ago, there was a poll done and it says that 65% of people were in favour of Europe. Now people are now defensive because of nationalists, but sometimes the arguments against that are rather technical. So why are politicians being so careful? Why are they being so lacking in zeal for the European project? And what about the idea of a federal Europe, a political Europe, even a fiscal Europe? So what would you like to say about anything on those? Just now, we said that there was no great European thought at the moment. And I think we could say that there's no real European vision at the moment, such as the vision that really moved into the founders in the post-war period. That's true. I think what we have to do is find again things that could mobilize people, things that could make the heart beat faster, not just the brain or the wallet. But I think this is a challenge though, and it's a challenge at national level. I'm not saying it's easier for every country to do this domestically. It's no easier to do it nationally than it would at European level. At the European level, it is a wee bit more complex. Now, I think it would be a good idea for everyone to read Robert Schumann's Declaration of 9th of May 1950. And now, I'm not just being nice to you because it's a French television, but he says everything. Now, he was talking about the hostile community, he was talking about reaching out to Germany, we're talking about 1950, and that tells you something. He also spoke of Africa. He spoke about the European, Europe's responsibility to Africa. Now, is that not also typical? He spoke about European Federation, and that was the purpose behind this. So that was the political idea. Jean Monnet said, okay, first we'll put together economics and markets and so on, and then we'll come to political union. Now, maybe still that's still underway, but I think we can say we're halfway across the river at the moment. And I think we have to be mindful of that. Now, this idea of a European discussion, a very forthright discussion, might show that we do share these challenges because we do need to relaunch things and we also need to appeal to people's hearts as well. So I think that's really the situation we face today. It's true. We need a very great debate on the future of Europe. What are we going to do? What are we heading for? What has the future in store for us? What are we going to do to get that? Are we going to proceed at different speeds? We need a debate on that. On the side of the Commission, we try to organize a debate with about 1,000 people participating in a number of countries. In France, there's the great debate as well and in the Netherlands as well. We've talked to thousands of people, but we still have to talk to quite a lot of them. To try and take stock on where we stand. But this debate cannot be done after finding solutions. It has to be done in order to find solutions. We are at the middle of the river, as you just said. We've got to be pragmatic or we've got to unite, try and find out about the future, try to reunite everybody around the same concepts of Europe. We have to proceed without the Brits and we need concrete results. As far as this debate is concerned, I'm more federalistic, of course. The fiscal union, it's fine, but it's not going to be done in the short run. We have to start the debate, indeed. And when I travel through our Europe, I see all youth and young people wanting this debate. So organize this debate. Exercise of pressure on your government's municipalities, etc. The debate has to be organized, not only before the elections, but now. As of now, it is needed. I'm a journalist at CNBC and I'm going to ask the question in English, no problem. Mr. Milanese touched on the definition of populism, that perhaps this is not the best word. So I was wondering, what is populism and what is the actual concept that you're trying to fight? Because if we don't understand that, then the fight is really... There's no sense for it. Thank you. Okay, now, just to avoid misunderstanding. Of course, I understand the meaning which is normally given to the word populism. I think, at least, that I understand it. I wonder if this is really the best definition for a variety of different political parties, political messages, political movement, and so on. If it's a catch-all definition that we conventionally agree to adopt, why not? I wonder if it's really the right one. I think that there are, and not only in certain European countries, the amazing thing is that we have that everywhere in Europe, everywhere around in Europe. There are movement, there are political parties, there is a political debate, there are political messages which broadly answer to what? To the lack of hope, the lack of trust, which is unfortunately widespread among the population. But in spite of the word unfortunately, I think that we need to pay an answer to that. And inevitably, the fact that in democracy, this kind of question goes into a vote for a political movement or a political party is not at all, in my view, negative in itself. The question is, would that allow the answer to be given? But the fact that we need to answer to what people don't trust anymore, to what people ask to get, to what people wish to get is compulsory for everyone. Traditional parties, new parties, populist parties, non-populist parties, whatever kind of definition we adopt. So I do not want to contest the word in itself. I think it's a bit sort of approximation, but we can adopt it conventionally as the one we can use. Another question, we have five minutes. Another question, we have just a few minutes. Go ahead, sir. Four minutes. Gentleman over there, and then a lady over here. Good afternoon. I'm going to ask more questions in English as well. My name is Dan Ayward. I'm a global shaper from Amsterdam. And what I'm wondering is, in the past we used to have like a vision for Europe. We had really great projects. We had open borders. We had a common currency. So these were really positive things. And it reminds me of yesterday when I was sitting in a session with the founder of Alibaba, Jack Ma. He mentioned that in China and in Africa there's a lot of energy and people look to a bright future and they have future visions. So what do you think would be the big project for Europe where we can all look together to something positive rather than looking at the negative elements that Europe brings us? So who wants to answer? Would you snide or maybe? Sure. As the only American on the panel. So returning to this gentleman's question, I think there's a way that you're faded to Europe, which isn't always clear. I want to say that there is a historical misunderstanding where there were nation states and there there is a problem. There were nation states. It's an illusion. The choice in Europe is between integration and empire. And if European integration is weakened now, that means that other empires, whether they're Chinese or American or Russian, grow stronger. That's the calculation. The big illusion is that one can go back to the nation state. And I mention this because I think the real division in European politics is not between populism and Europe. It's between past and future. The way that the people we call the populists are winning is that they have, as you've said, they've removed the future from the conversation. We're all either talking about the past or trying to defend the present. So I think the people who win are the people who actually restore the future tense to the conversation. And I think that might include some projects that are dramatic, right, that are the kinds of things that the Americans and the Chinese do, the Americans have been shy about, like bragging about your space program, for example. But I also think there's a lot to be said for, and I'm now just echoing what the European colleagues have said, there's a lot to be said for saying, hey, we are the only unit in the world that is actually handling the actual problems of the future, which are digital human rights, oligarchy, climate change. We are the only unit in the world that's actually handling those things. I think there's a lot to be said for that. That could be a vision. The final question over there, madam. We've got one minute left. No, we like competition in the business world. We see that something that stimulates us in Europe. Couldn't we have some kind of emulation or best practices for the systems of social protection, for educational systems in the Nordic or German speaking countries, and perhaps even a dynamic labour market in the UK, which we're losing somewhat. So rather than talk all the time about regulating and becoming more and more red tape oriented, can't we have an open liberal system for best practices? Yes, I think that's the reason we have to do it, because in Europe, there are a lot of things to do. I think we have to do it. There are some very good practices, particularly in the northern European countries. We have much to learn from them in education on the subject of diversity and also in terms of sustainable investment. I don't think this has been done enough. Why? Because countries are frightened of being in competition, because they think that it's going to weaken them. I think it's a question of mindset. We have to change people's mindset. I think that Europe is a community where we want to help one another and where we can learn from one another. But we need also to be very careful. We don't need to cut and paste. I think that what is happening in France, oh, it's fantastic. They've got a German system for apprenticeship. We've just got to copy it. No, I don't think that that is the right thing to do. Why? Because there is a revolution in the labour market going on. And you've got to copy certain things, but you have to adapt it and make it future-proof. So it's benchmarking. But at the same time, you've got to evolve. Thank you very much. So this is the end of the session. Thank you very much for having participated. Thank you very much for the panel. You were fantastic.