 allowed to do it. Perhaps it's my privilege to do so rather than having to do it. I may hear as the Austrian Chancellor here, but I'm also speaking to you as a European. And I'm a European who is grateful for the fact that I can live in Europe, and I'm also grateful that I grew up in Europe. And as a European though, who is mindful of the fact that everything that we like, freedom, security, well-being is not something you can take for granted elsewhere. And also as a European, which has been thinking about these changing times, Brexit, Trump, China, as you've just said. And these are going to impinge on the role of Europe in the world. And given my age, perhaps I would also say I'm just 32 and I grew up in Austria. And I think you could say I belong to a generation from Central Europe, which really saw something as war and violence as something which was a long way from us. Where we saw the rule of law, where we saw human rights as being something that we took for granted, where you could actually develop yourself in full freedom, you could choose your own educational path and do what you wanted to do. And this was something that we just took as part of the world. And if things went wrong, then there was a social safety net if you needed it. And what I've just said, perhaps that might be something that you're all used to in this room. But if you look around the world, then you can realize very quickly that what we take for granted is in fact something internationally speaking, that is an amazing privilege. And it is something which happens in seldom. And I was a foreign minister in recent years and I traveled a great deal. And when I was traveling, I was always aware of the fact that what we take as normal in Central Europe is something that is just a distant dream. And therefore, if you look at a younger generation in Europe, that not only do we want to safeguard what we've got in Europe, but we want to also help those who live elsewhere to improve their living conditions so that they can realize that dream. And as a foreign minister in recent years, I also saw that the world is speeding up, that changes are coming at pace, and there's a real global competition and that progress is happening more quickly. And this means that the role of Europe is not something that would necessarily stay as is over the long term. There are countries which are to become the biggest economy in the world, China, for instance. There are smaller states, smaller than such as Singapore and Israel, which are smaller than Austria. And not only are they catching up on Europe, they're actually overtaking Europe to some extent. And we as the European Union are good at setting standards on democracy, on rule of law and human rights. But when it comes to innovation, growth and wealth creation, then we don't seem to be those setting the standards anymore. And I think we should be clear that only a strong and robust Europe can make an international contribution. And only if we have economic success will we be able to put across our principles such as human rights, democracy and so on. And I think as competition gets harsher, we shouldn't take a step back from it. I think what we should do is to try and improve. And perhaps I could just share a few ideas with you on this, areas where I think there's room for improvement. First, I think we have to do our homework. And now there are some countries and this is what you've seen. If you think about Spain, Finland and Ireland and what happens that they just jettison the old ideas over Europe, that is to say higher taxes, more bureaucracy and a higher debt. And these countries have shown that there's another approach. And what they've done is they've got a comparatively robust economy now. And they have got rising wealth. In recent years in Austria, we have also tried to go against that old concept. We have tried to bring down the tax burden. And we are trying to reduce regulations. And we are also trying to change our debt policy after 60 years. Finally, we ought to budgetary surplus and not more debt. And this means that we become more competitive. It brings in investments and we're proud if it doesn't go to Germany, but it comes to Austria instead. Particularly if it's big German companies coming to Austria, it makes us very proud. And this also means there's greater freedom for the individual, but greater freedom as well for entrepreneurs. In line with that homework that has to be done nationally, I think it's important that at European level that we resolve all those crises which are hanging over everything at the moment. Now we're looking at focus, we're looking at Brexit, migration, trade conflicts with the United States. I think what we should do is bring those crises behind us. So mount them so that we can start looking ahead. In migration, I think we've made quite a bit of progress. There is 95% fewer arrivals than in 2015. So if we are able to work together with North African countries and we can step that up, and if we can make sure that those countries do more rescues in the Mediterranean and to take people back, and not just Europe doing the rescue, and then also at the time when they rescue them, giving them a ticket to Central Europe, if we continue that effort, then I think we would stop the smugglers. We would take away the bases of their business and I think we would improve. So Brexit, I would plead that we do everything to avoid a hard Brexit, but this would not only damage the UK, but it would be very damaging to Europe as well. So I do trust that a majority, we don't have a plan A, at least the plan B would work, and we have a plan B for the UK Parliament, and if that doesn't happen, then I think we should have the courage to defer the date of Brexit so as to make sure that there is no hard Brexit. And now, looking at the trade dispute with the United States, I do hope that we can resolve this before it gets worse, because neither we nor the Europeans have any interest in this, and we're not going to benefit from it. Now, also there are other crises as well and we would appeal that we stick to the rules that we've set ourselves. What we tend to do is that we set a lot of rules and regulations, but those which are essential, then perhaps we don't take them too seriously. Now, if people don't stick to Maastricht criteria, that means there's over-intendedness, and this could mean that it can jeopardize the if people don't stick to the Dublin arrangements for migration without bringing in something in better, then there's chaos rather than good order. And if some of the basic tenets such as democracy, the freedom of the press, and rule of law are questioned, then we would be relinquishing something which is the very basis of what we do. Therefore, I trust that in all of these areas, we would get better and get quicker. But what I'd like to say today is, and I think just not only should we obey rules and solve crises and become more ready to make decisions, but I believe we need a new consciousness as Europe. Now, if you travel wherever you are in Davos Brussels, then we do tend to have a slightly negative, a slightly depressive way in which we're tackling things as Europeans. And I think that's the wrong way to go about things. We're in a faster world. We're in a tougher world, really, in terms of competition. And I think we as Europeans and as the EU to be more self-confident, we have 500 million people. That is a quarter of the world economy. And we have done humanitarian work and supported development, and we're the biggest contributor to that worldwide. And I think what we need here is that we need to set higher ambitions in the auto industry, for example. And we want to have the same strength as we have with electric cars as we do with the internal combustion engine. And we should not say that we've been beaten there. And we should work together across borders so that we can catch up in those areas where perhaps we've lagged behind in recent years. And I would say this, particularly saying this in Davos, we should also be a place where people can have startups. We need new business startups. We need innovation. And we don't want to lose out there. Europe, and I think we would all agree on this, is the best place in the world to live. We have a very good starting point for this. What we now is to be a bit more self-confident. I'm not just talking about being too proud. I'm certainly not talking about nationalism. But I think there needs to be a healthy self-confidence here. And that is always to be linked with the gratitude that we're able to live here and a sense of responsibility vis-a-vis other parts of the world. But it's only if we have that confidence, if we set high ambitions and we do that so that we can stay stronger, not only will be successful in Europe, but we will make a world contribution as well. Thank you. Question. Thank you, Chancellor. Thank you for that keynote address. Thank you for your input. And as someone from Brussels, thank you for that appeal to be more self-confident and to be in a better mood, basically. My question is, now I think you correspondents, you journalists have plenty of self-confidence. Okay. Now, I'll give you an example. You spoke about working across borders and talking about artificial intelligence. Why don't we have that cooperation already? And secondly, who is willing to look at Europe and start in Europe when you might have low-framing fruit elsewhere? Well, we're a small country and we're prepared to do this. And I would just tell you why. Now, in a lot of areas, we depend on the strength of other countries. For example, let's take the auto industry. The German car industry is certainly essential to German economy. But it's also a very important industry as well, because our supplier industry, which is very strong, is very dependent on German companies. And of course, it doesn't help us if batteries are built elsewhere in the world or if electronic vehicles are built elsewhere in the world. It gives us nothing. And therefore, let's say, perhaps the German car industry is something that should be working on this. Now, if Germany lags behind, then that's going to have a knock-on effect on our supply industry. Question. Are you saying with the German car industry is ruining the future of Austria or your future competitiveness? No, no, absolutely not. No, I think when I spoke about this healthy self-confidence, that means we have need better support for our business and for industry. Now, I think the way in which we actually work on this in Europe, I'm not just about Germany, but let's say in the German-speaking countries, how we actually deal with these issues facing our industry. And now that might not happen elsewhere in the world. I can't imagine, for example, that China with Chinese companies, which are so central as they are in, as the auto industry is in Germany and Austria, that they would deal with them in the way that we do. Now, I think this is a different approach. And I say that we have to focus on our own industry. So I'll give you another example. I think we have to move away. This idea of always cheap is good. I think we have to talk about the quality is good. And I think we need these infrastructure projects in Europe. But we shouldn't say that they have to be done at the same price as they would in Chinese companies. I think sometimes we punish our countries twice. We have a great regulations to the next world. We have higher taxation than elsewhere in the world. And after all that, then they don't give the best bid when we're doing a procurement. And that's not fair on them either. And I think we have to have a certain courage here. We have to really consider our own interest and put those centre stage or something negative. I'm not being nationalistic when I say that. But this would mean that we would then safeguard the strength that we need within Europe so that we can also make a contribution to the world. Question. What do you see as the legislative approach to this? Are you saying that we should change competition law? Now, you've got Eisterman and Siemens struggle. Are you saying that this is difficult? Should we say that we have political priorities here? Do you think that should come in and be allowed through? Well, there are certain European approaches to this. But there are certain measures which can be taken nationally. For example, what do you do with the investment in key industries? Do you allow them? Do you not allow them? And here it might be possible that you can perhaps have to do certain things before you can allow such support. I don't think we should really pass the buck to Brussels here. We should blame them. But I would say, though, that we have to a little bit look at our general approach. Question. I think you said quite correctly that Europe is a good place to live. But as you've seen at summits, you feel sometimes that the gaps are getting greater. There were some great misunderstandings. I was at another discussion with the Marovietzky downstairs and from the Netherlands. And you get the feeling here that there's a slightly harsher tone now. Now, you had the President of the Council for six months. How did you see that from the inside? And how can we bring people back together? I mean, or don't we have to? No, I think this is a bit of a problem, really, quite a series. And I think this is quite a difficult problem. There's a bit of a vicious circle here with politics and the media, how we actually deal with each other. And I think there's no longer that common denominator, perhaps. And I think this is very bad for European unity and the whole project. We saw the first gaps in the financial crisis. And this was compounded during the migration crisis. And we were at this, all these quibbles about where migrants should go. And rather than focusing on protecting the outer borders, we were really sort of saying, who should accept refugees and who shouldn't accept them? And who should decide which country they should go? So and I think we were doing that. And I think that was quite risky, such an approach. And I think we allowed this to happen in recent years. And I do hope that we can get back to some common sense here. Because such, basically, this puts gaps between Europe. It creates those differences. And I see this as something as a problem. Now, I know this is something you like to talk about. But if we could look at the rule of law, you now quite clearly, there are some different perceptions, for example, in the policy, things differently to the Dutch. Now, I wouldn't like to generalize here, because Poland is more than just the current government. And therefore, I would be rather cautious in how I put this, I would not have these general assessments. I mean, you were implying that the Netherlands is better as Poland. That seems to be what you're saying. No, no, I'm just saying it's different perceptions, really. Well, Mark Rutte might be different to the head of government in Poland. But I think we have to be very cautious in how we say these things. I'm not saying that we should compromise on the rule of law. But the way in which this debate is taking place, I think, is risky. I'll give you an example. I remember I was at a meeting in Germany and the moderator said he couldn't imagine to be in the EU, where the UK and Switzerland aren't there, but countries such as Romania and Hungary are a member. So I thought, well, how do the Romanians and the Haganians in the room feel? I mean, perhaps it's okay here, perhaps there are none. But I didn't feel that he sort of felt guilty at putting it that way. But he didn't realize that it might not sound so good. And I see that as risky. I don't think we should make any compromises on democracy and rule of law. That's fine. But the way in which we discuss this, the way in which, to some extent, there's an attempt made to say the others are morally inferior. I think that's a problem. And I think there's this muddling happening, really. And what I mean is the democracy and rule of law, of course, have to be kept at any cost. But if a country is prepared to open up its borders and allow in refugees, has absolutely nothing to do with the rule of law and democracy, and in other issues as well, then I think you could say that the Eastern European countries have to be able to have a different attitude to that of Germany. And in the EU, we have to say that the smaller countries, perhaps don't think that the compromise between Germany and France is ideal. And I think this is a conversation that we have to have. Okay, question. Now, I know a lot of people in Austria, your minister, your minister in the interior recently said in Austria that the law has to follow politics and not politics law. Now, this was taken in Austria as an attack on the rule of law in Austria. What you would say as the chancellor, who has just come down clearly on the side of the rule of law and said there's no compromise. Now, I phoned him. I wasn't in Austria today. And I phoned. And I told him quite clearly what I think on this. And I think I think he understands that and accepts that. Now, in our coalition agreement, everything that has been discussed here has been very carefully enshrined. And we have a constitution, of course, about international law, European law, and international agreements, which of course have to apply. And this doesn't just go for the chancellor, this go for every member of government. Furthermore, in Austria, what we have at the moment is a discussion about what can happen when people have applied for asylum and but have committed a crime? Should they be expelled from the country? And what would then constitute an act that would justify their expulsion? And this is a question that we have. But I guess this is also something at European level as well. Now, there's something else that I think, which I'm sure is people, that's Brexit, I'm sure that's of interest to people in the room. Now, we're just 60 days from what might be hard Brexit. Can we, and I'm saying this as the European Union and EU 27 can just allow that to happen. If there might be another solution, you've got Ireland, you've got Northern Ireland, that border, and then there are no 40 billion missing from the budget. And we would have millions of Europeans either British or Europeans living there, and they wouldn't know on what basis they're living. Well, I don't want to over exaggerate this. I think now we do have to try to avoid a hard Brexit that we don't want that to happen. And I would also like to say that the EU and also the member states of it have done all that they could to prepare for this scenario. In other words, now I don't want I don't want to sort of risk a headline saying it's not going to get that bad. But I think we are prepared for that scenario. And in parallel to that, I think we have to do everything to avoid it's happening. Now, you said, can we just allow it to happen? Well, I don't think anyone just wants it to happen. No one's just standing idly by. So I think we can say everyone's against we stand shoulder to shoulder against hard Brexit during the negotiations and also at this stage as well. There is agreement between the EU 27 between the Council of Commission and the European Parliament. And as a correspondent in Brussels, you'll know that they're rather all free agree. So I think we can say that the EU should not see itself as not doing well here. But of course, what we depended on is what is decided on in the UK. I know that Theresa May is really trying hard. I wouldn't want her to upgrade her at all. But a lot of those who are against her plans at the moment may change their opinion, particularly those who are doing it for tactical reasons. Now, you're saying that you might be prepared to defer Brexit. Now, that is to say, if the UK were to ask for it, so we would consider it. Would you say that the hard press is getting close? That might be something that we could actively offer. But the UK doesn't really do that far ahead. They don't seem ready to take a decision at the moment. Well, offers on the table. I and a number of our and Mr Barnier has said that he's in contact with the British and with Theresa May. And I think the offer has been made. So I think there's an awareness in the UK that the EU is willing to do everything to avoid a hard Brexit. Now, if it's necessary, then to defer this, of course, then the UK have to want it as well. It wouldn't be enough for us to try and defer it, despite they're wanting to leave. And therefore, the we wouldn't have enough power to do that. However self confident we might be, would you accept that even with the problem, the problems that this might cause with the European elections? Or would the European elections be the ultimate deadline? Now, I think that would have to be the final deadline really. Because if we went beyond that, if we didn't have any plan, then that wouldn't really help. And it would adjust a mobile on the agony to some extent, and it wouldn't resolve the situation. So I think if we do have a deferral, then we would need a plan as to what is to be achieved. Now, were it to go beyond the European elections, then I would say that we should go for a flexible solution. And now I know legally, they would then take part in those elections, and there might be a possibility there to go down a different track. Now, when we joined, I think we actually took members of the European Parliament from the National Parliament. But this is all a little bit speculative at the moment, though, now the best scenario would be that we use the time that we have. And if that isn't sufficient, then we would defer. But it would not be on the European elections. And well, and if, well, if that doesn't work out, we'd have to look at it again. Well, thank you very much, Chancellor. I think we had a clear plea for stronger cooperation in Europe, a Europe where we have to look at our industrial policy and our competition policy. Perhaps we need to rethink those. We have to base this on the rule of law, and we need a Europe.