 Please say good morning. You're all very very welcome to this morning's state of the union address. For those of you who don't know although it's so great to see so many familiar faces. My name is Dermot Holland and it's a really privileged for me to chair once again this morning session which is being organised by the European Commission representation here in Ireland by the European Parliament Liaison office at the Iiea in Dublin. of present Fonderline's address, her third such address. Possibly Annar, we're thinking for the address to take place, but you will get a chance to take part in the discussion. Those here in Dublin in the audience can participate in the Q&A by just raising your hand and letting us know. Anyone else who's joining us on YouTube or elsewhere on the live stream, you can send in your Q&A through the Zoom function and we will get to as many of them as possible. Submit them during the Q&A function and whether you're here or elsewhere, do let us know who you are when you get to your question. For those in the room, just as a courtesy door contributor, if you could put your phones on silent. Without further ado, let me introduce you to our panel, none of whom needs any introduction. To Bridget Laffan, Professor Emeritus and Former Director of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at the EU Institute in Florence. You're very, very welcome. Bridget, Alice-Marie Higgins on my far right, is an independent senator in Sianadair where she leads a civil engagement group and she's a member of so many committees, environment, climate action, finance and public expenditure and reform. John O'Brennan who almost gave me a little heart attack because I didn't know where he was because he went to the wrong mine street. He is the gene manager in European integration and director for the Centre of European and Eurasian Studies at Maynooth and last but not least. We are joined by David Sullivan who is the IAA director general amongst many, many other accomplishments. I think we can see a very, very prominent theme which is going to set the scene for much of the address this morning. What I'm going to do is we're going to have just maybe some brief initial thoughts from everyone here on the panel and as soon as we see it go live we will join the address. Bridget Loughnan, I might just start with you. Europe it seems and certainly since President von der Leyen has taken over it seems to be one existential crisis after another. What are you looking out for this morning? The first thing I would say is we've actually got to stop using the word existential when it comes to the EU because everyone says every crisis is existential and it survives them all. The EU is not an existential crisis, it will survive this one as well. Significant, significant challenges facing. Huge, huge. I would say this is a State of the Union speech like no other. It's at a time when Europe is at war, when war has returned to Europe. So I would say I would watch the tone. Let's see how she frames this because she knows all governments are facing very sensitive issues as well. So what I would say we should pay attention to tone and then I think in terms of what will be majored on clearly Ukraine and Ukraine in terms of geopolitics because Europe has fretted a lot about geopolitics in terms of supply chains in China that remains but now it's hard geopolitics as well. Clearly the energy crisis, I think she will make proposals on energy. She has to the ministers met last Friday. It's the top issue for the winter and the broader social impact inflation, the impact on families, the cost of living crisis and all of that. Clearly climate and climate transition and then I would say she will remind the EU, the member states and the citizens because I think she's trying to speak to the citizens as well today that when Europe hangs together, when there's solidarity, then it's stronger. So I would say that she will argue that this crisis Europe has to be united, has to be at one and only if it's at one can it pull through. And then finally I would say you get something on the future of Europe. I don't expect anything on Brexit but some reference to the Queen. And obviously Olga Zelensky, John, receiving an applause there this morning. There is now a State of the Union political bingo game you can play. You can guess what is going to come up in the speech. What do you think is not going to come up? What do you think might be omitted? Well, energy, Ukraine and tackling democracy. I think those are obviously the three things that are most important. I'd be very interested in the light of the revelations yesterday about Russia's sponsoring of extreme parties and disruption in democracies in the west. What she's going to say about that because obviously there are member states of the European Union where the rule of law is in a pretty dreadful state and there have been regular criticisms of the commission that it hasn't acted sufficiently or sufficiently robustly to protect democracy in Hungary, Poland and elsewhere. It's a sensitive issue, ongoing negotiations with both Budapest and Warsaw about commitments that they have made around rule of law issues, but it's sensitive for a whole variety of reasons. And there we are very much on time this year. Let's cross over to John and David. We won't get to everything obviously. David, at the opening, Brigid invited us to pay attention to the tone. It began with we will be tested. We will prevail. Ukraine crisis showed Europe at its best. What were your initial thoughts? Well, you know, I can be a bit of a cynic occasionally, you know, 40 years of working in the European institutions. I've seen a lot of things come and go. I've written a few of these speeches. I have to say, I thought that was genuinely inspiring. I thought it was a remarkable speech. I thought she really captured the mood. I think the commission's communication skills have improved remarkably, Barbara, from the early days when we were very clumsy. I think it has. But I really just felt she really captured the mood. I mean, we can discuss, you know, some of the details. I'm sure the proposal for a European convention will have a few member states scratching their heads. But I thought, you know, her basic emphasis on values on what we stand for on the challenge which the war, Russian war in Ukraine poses, not just to, you know, a military situation or the independence of Ukraine, but to what we stand for, what kind of future we have. The link between the energy crisis, climate change, the emphasis on the need to kind of have a new economic and social model, business model to adapt to the changing situation. The reference to young people, of course, because I think we all know this is a very real challenge with a generation feeling perhaps that my generation hasn't left them in as good a shape as we were able to be. So I honestly, Shapo, I thought she really, it was an excellent speech. And, you know, you have to bear in mind that she's speaking in three languages. English is not her native language, but I really thought she, the only thing that disappointed me, if I may say so, was on the parliament side. There were quite a few empty seats, mostly on the right-hand side of the hemicycle, but honestly, all throughout it. I thought the parliament let itself down a bit there by not turning out in full force. I mean, if you go to the State of the Union in Washington, which I had the privilege to do on four occasions, I mean, it's literally there are people sitting on the steps. So I thought maybe that was a lost opportunity for the parliament to assert its role, but otherwise, honestly, excellent performance. I mean, then we can discuss some of the proposals are controversial, some of them will be, you know, some of it will maybe not go as far as we might like it to, but one of the best speeches I've heard from a president of the commission in a long time. Alice Murray, courage, solidarity. These were the big, big themes. It was certainly the frame within. Everything was set. It was amazing to see all the female leaders, as they could all out in their blue and yellow. Certainly that was the big, big support, but beyond Ukraine, and I suppose the connections between the Russian aggression and the energy crisis. Looking at the temporary and exclusionary measures being proposed in respect of energy and the companies, and also her comments in respect of not just household, but also SMEs facing what she described as both inflation and uncertainty. Do you think the speech delivered on what is, I suppose, heating and eating, I think we can reduce it down to what most people are worried about going into winter? I think there is really interesting, so on energy, a lot of it is some of which we've seen, we knew coming out of the meeting of energy ministers, the direction, but I thought it was, there were some very interesting things around energy because there are those temporary measures that we've heard about, but she did also talk about that kind of structural reform of the market. It's interesting that we're seeing the fact that the need for different measures in how, for example, gas is being treated and how renewables are, and in a way it's a different, if we look just back one year when you had the taxonomy and kind of an attempt to blend together gas and renewables, we are seeing this acknowledgement of very different strategies and very different approaches needed on boats. I thought I was very struck by the, you know, we had the car free weekends, but the same road, so what I thought was interesting was these kind of emergency measures that are there, that idea of, you know, the capping of prices and so forth, but also the recognition for the need for radical reform in the market. And I wonder will it leave to a shift away from that gas approach. On the economic, the eating and heating, the basic need piece was covered, but I must say I have a little bit of concerns just around some of how, you know, there seems to be a little bit of a role around towards the old fiscal rule framework, so the idea of, you know, strategic investment being excluded. And there is a real debate there because, you know, things like education that were being spoken about very strongly and repeatedly by the commission president, some of those are not going to fit a strategic investment frame within, for example, the semester process and others, because they don't deliver an immediate financial benefit, but they're crucial for society. So I suppose the social spending piece, I'm left with a few question marks around, is there really support for social spending? Are we going to, you know, for example, with sustained, that idea of spending sustainably, but what about, you know, the sustainable development goals and those whole picture, not all of them fit an investment return mechanism? Just remind everybody if they're using, there's three handles at EU Ireland, at EPN Ireland and at IAEA and using the hashtag SOTEU22. Coming back to you, Bridget, obviously that £140 billion being promised by the crisis levy or looking at the companies, but also this notion of a hydrogen bank and the delicate balance between reducing the gas dependency particularly the Russian supply, but also trying to meet the emerging, well not emerging, the full blown climate crisis that we're facing. That's a very, very delicate balance and you could really see her trying to make those connections between both. Absolutely and of course energy dependency has put Europe, walked into and Germany in particular has proved to be one of Europe's achilles heels and now the shock of Ukraine means that that is being addressed, will be addressed. But of course we also have the climate crisis. For me, I think the strategic actually matters a lot. Why? Because Europe needs to be, the world is shifting very dramatically and Europe has got to be very strategic about its political economy, its energy. We're now in a time when Europe in 30 years will be determined a lot by what we do over the next 10 to 15 years. So I welcome anything that makes Europe more strategic, anything that makes Europe look at not to become protectionist because that won't work, but understands that dependency, strategic autonomy has, has meet. And so I really welcome the strategic discussion around energy because also it's intergenerational. If we don't get this right, we're really, the cost will be born by the next generation. Which of course was her final point when she was building up towards the European Convention, which we will get to, but it was interesting when you said not protectionist and yet when she was talking in the context of the new European sovereignty fund, she was talking about a future of Europe made in Europe, even the critical materials act. It is not quite tax cuts and jobs act, but you did get a sense of bringing it back home as efficiency on the continent. So I think Europe is not saying no to globalization. What Europe is saying now is shifting globalization in certain ways that suit us better. In other words, breaking that dependency because I can't remember the dependency on China was 90% for, it was 60% for Lithium and 90% for something else, but that's too high. That's way too high. That's handing China huge power. And the other thing I would say is we're also seeing an EU emerge where public finance plays a very important role in the future. There was historically Europe's main public power was regulation. That continues to be important. But here we're seeing the development of a public finance Europe that's very different to the old budgets that I wrote a book about in the 1990s. And that's something I think to watch. But I do think we are seeing, I've argued since Brexit, we have seen and are seeing a very new European Union emerge. And to me, everything she said today confirms the fact that Europe is trying, and it's extremely difficult because of heterogeneity and difference, to really respond to the world that Europe finds itself in rather than the world that Europe would want. Europe always would prefer if the world was more like Europe. We now know it's not. So it's very good that the wake up call in Europe that the world, we now have to face a world that isn't entirely of our making, but we have to try to steer a pathway through that world. And none of this is easy. None of this. There isn't any easy public policy challenge here. And that includes, I suppose, John, foreign policy, two major issues in respect of accession, but also democracy she spoke of the need for a defence of democracy pact, and also huge support for Georgia, Moldova, for Ukraine at the heart of Europe. But even that is not as easy as it sounds. No, it isn't. I agree with Bridget. The commission set out an ambition at the beginning of Underline's term to be a geopolitical commission, and I think we're getting there. It is becoming more strategic in all kinds of senses. But specifically on accession, I noted that, and I agree with David, it was the finest state of the Union speech that I have seen, but the language she used at the beginning about Ukraine was very, very emphatic, I think. And she came back to it when she spoke about defending democracy, attacking corruption within the European Union, and so on. Which got huge applause. It got a lot of applause. Within Europe, within the continent, that she identified that, and I note that Emily O'Reilly also wrote a silly into peace earlier this week, pointing to issues of that, of the need for Europe to get its house in order before it tells others, including accession countries. I think the reason that you saw that kind of response in the parliament is that the parliament is, to some extent, significantly ahead of the commission, and has been very critical of the failures of the commission over many years to adequately tackle, on behalf of the EU, the abuses of power that we have seen in Hungary, in Poland and elsewhere. I noted, however, on accession, where she mentioned Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia. She didn't mention the Western Balkans to my mind, and this is the most fragile region of Europe. These countries were promised European Union membership in Thessaloniki in 2003, so they've been waiting two decades. They have essentially been flatlining along this trajectory of broken promises. There's absolutely no incentive for reform. Yesterday we saw an ultra-nationalist government in Serbia cancelling the Euro Pride festival, which is supposed to take place this weekend in Belgrade. It was merely the latest indication of just how distant Serbia is from membership. Also, just to hear John say, we'll continue to defend the independence of the judiciary, as if that is something that needed to be said in the heart of Europe. I'm going to go to the panel, because David, you identified correctly what a lot of people would be interested in. This is a question from Anouk Moula. He's a student in the Ren Political Science Institute in France. She says, first of all, she's very impressed by the solidarity shown to Ukraine, and in a way, she says to Uweager. She said, I have a lingering question, as you had after listening to President van der Leyen. What does the panel think she means with this European Convention? And could you explore what that goal and form of this initiative might be, not least because treaty change, of course, is a company by referendum, certainly, in this jurisdiction? Well, I mean, I think this is ultimately one of the more difficult challenges we're going to face in the next few years, because as the President said, and I don't think she mentioned the Western Balkans clearly. I mean, we have, I think, 10 countries lined up for, especially, I didn't mention Turkey, which is a candidate country, but where things are not going very well. It is clear that if we are talking about a further expansion of the European Union of that scale, we need internal reform. We are not capable of absorbing 10 new countries with our existing structures and systems, but nobody really wants to engage in that discussion. And this is the challenge. So, I mean, what she meant by European Convention, I mean, she specifically mentioned it strangely, I thought, about intergenerational solidarity. I mean, it seemed to be a rather limited thing, because if you started a discussion about reforming the treaties, it will run much, much broader than that. What she actually said was it's time to enshrine solidarity between generations in our treaties post up, and then the moment has arrived for a European Convention. So, I was trying to see. Yeah, well, I'm assuming that, yes, she was specifically mentioning that, but she knows, as everyone does, that if you launch a European Convention on Institutional Reform and Treaty Reform, it will have a much broader agenda. Osmyr, what were your thoughts on that? I thought it was very interesting. I was a member of the future of your process, and I suppose I'm looking to, you know, some of the focus was around the things that involved treaty change, but there was a lot of other recommendations, some of which were still seen, you know, which there's no obstacle to that. There's no obstacle to moving forward on that haven't yet been moved forward. So, I suppose when we saw it, I was wondering, I mean, is that the youth test that we've, you know, has been promised, how much progress could be made on the youth test, you know, without or previous to a convention, you know, the fundamental rights. So, one of the issues, if I look to the issues that had really strong messages from those participating, that idea of most people already think in Europe we found that the Charter of Fundamental Rights is part of the rule of law, but of course it's not. And that's why in the rule of law engagement at the moment with Hungary, you know, it's focusing on procurement, on corruption, on the financial issues, whereas a lot of the public concern has been on those issues of the breaching of fundamental rights. So, you know, is it a convention around the protection of fundamental rights? Is that what we mean by do no harm or is there going to be something pushed out front and then there's a whole load of other issues that are probably more controversial that maybe weren't talked about in terms of the convention around the processes. So, I think it's one of those areas where more definitely needs, but the principle of a convention has been pushed for by the parliament. The question of, is it a convention about how we work, you know, is it a convention around strengthening those individual rights? And for me I certainly had a sense that there were certain issues supported more from the convention on the future of Europe than others. Sort of a big tease at the end of it. We've done very much a tease. A youth test that would be the showpiece on the convention. What is the convention probably or what does it mean? Bridget, can I go back to you just on the Green Deal agenda, which I know is a subject that is close to your heart, because, you know, you read the business pages, there are countries that are trying to prevent a Lehman-like response, huge liquidity crisis for many companies that are facing collateral obligations. Some of the things that she was talking about, the measures, both on a standalone basis and collectively, are actually, you're talking about major structural reform to key utility markets. And speaking to, you know, that earlier discussion, does it have the institutional and governance capacity, do you think, to address all of that? Because those are things we can try to tackle immediately, but that have long-term market implications. Absolutely. So, I think that what the war in Ukraine has done is it has exposed and made, firstly made more urgent the climate issues and the acceleration of the climate crisis itself. But it has also exposed the pain involved. In other words, this is the mother of all collective action problems. I think what she was saying about the market for electricity, that's been on the agenda for ever and ever and ever. I, in my last life in Shuman, we had what was called the Florence School of Regulation, which was set up after something called the Florence Forum on Electricity Markets, which started tackling the utility, the monopoly problem. And of course, these are very big monopolies, they're very powerful and very hard to change. But now we're in a new game and a new, there's a new stage. And Europe has tended to find the governance capacities either formally or informally and also cross the levels when it needs to. So I would expect that it will, I think it will be extreme, it is very urgent and will be addressed. But what we still, the struggle in Europe will be, the impact of all of it, not just on our SMEs, but on each of us as individuals, households and all that. Are us turning the lights out when the last visitor goes to the Eiffel Tower? Exactly. The kind of, all of that. And so I think that's such a big societal shift that it requires more than government. That's a pact with society to change how we are. And of course what Europe does on the climate crisis in and of itself is simply not enough. So that's also the partnership with other parts of the world. But I do think what we've seen over the last, in an accelerated way over the last number of years, is we can't hide from the climate crisis anymore. Can I, just before we go on, I will be taking questions. I want to go to Alison John on just an issue relating to the rule of law. It was interesting. We can't get through the entire speech, but when she was talking about that incident in Amsterdam last year, the creation of various institutes, the disinformation campaign is not just being waged by both outside of the union. It is very much something that is alive and central here. And although courage, solidarity were the big themes, the energy crisis, the general political division, the culture wars, everything, is a challenge to social cohesion within the union? Yeah, on China I think the EU has been late to wake up to the nature of the threat, but it has. And the Amsterdam case was replicated here in Ireland, you may remember, when an academic at UCD, who was raising serious issues about human rights, the treatment of the ugar population, for example in western China, we then saw the Chinese government try to put pressure on the Department of Foreign Affairs and the government to the great credit of his department, Bridget's old department, they absolutely supported him solidly. But it's an indication of the insidious ways in which China has tried to insert these soft power instruments into the member states of the union. So I think we have to be very careful. The universities, I think, really should do a complete inventory of all our links with China. And I would suggest that we should divest almost completely from China because we'll be in the same sort of situation that many were in terms of their institutional links with Russia. Because Xi Jinping's much more muscular Chinese foreign policy suggests that that problem is certainly not going to go away and it's probably going to get worse in the years ahead. Can I just on that social cohesion particularly when the reality is winter is coming and people are going to be under so much pressure as President von der Leyen said, we will be tested. So just really quickly though on the human rights piece, because I did want to add in, it was something, we do need that human rights regime that was tested, that there is consistency around the human rights testing so we know that there's a rightful move away from Russian gas but we also need to be looking at the human rights issues in relation to Saudi Arabia and for example in relation to, there are concerns around, even under repowering EU, some of the agreements signed for example with Israel that are not as clear about occupied territory. So there's a few, I think for Europe to be strong on that human rights piece, we will need to be shown to be applying it very strongly in all of our agreements and of course in terms of things like lithium, that's going to be, we know that the trade agreements with Chile are being renegotiated and that's going to have to be, you know, there's been some concern. You talked about the need to build up strategic reserves. Yes, and in terms of being strategic is really important but it's also important, there's a strong ethic in that and I thought, you know, we saw the decolonised Russia poster that is there. When we talk about the world that Europe finds itself in, Europe did shape a lot of that world and I'd like to acknowledge that and that's where things like going and having an impact in the climate talks will mean that Europe and Ireland need to be contributing around things like the climate justice and the 100 billion followed in that regard. But on social cohesion and that's what I say strategic. I'm not saying let's not have strategy, the question is what do we mean by strategic and I think it was acknowledged the errors that the years it took in terms of the financial crisis partly because there was not enough strategic emphasis placed on social cohesion and that was something that then in the COVID crisis Europe said social cohesion needs to be a priority. So when we talk about strategic I'm just saying it's very important that in our financial solutions and our instruments even especially in the changes to our economic governance that we make sure that social investment in social cohesion is recognised as strategic as well and I think that's going to be crucial. It's good that there's going to be pricing impacts from the energy piece. I think the idea of that collective public spending. I think that the return of public spending for making the changes we need as was mentioned. We didn't even get I think the 100 billion spent under the next year and about 700 million to go. I think that's really positive as well. Is there a mic for everyone in the room? There is. So put your hand up. Before I come to it, David, I'll give you an easy question here from Paul Oatwer formerly of the Department of Finance. He wonders whether the rapid deepening of EU integration in response to recent crisis is leading us. He wants to know where is that leading us. He said, are we seeing the emergence of a European super state? So an easy one for you. Look, this European super state is a complete myth. It's not the model we're following. What we are doing is building something completely unique in international relationship which is building a voluntary union of sovereign states who act collectively where it delivers better outcomes than can be delivered by individual countries. That's what it is. So it's wrong to compare it to a country like the United States or like France or even a federal state like Australia or Canada. That's not what we're doing. And we have to stop constantly trying to make it look like it is a country. We're building a unique model and we have to find unique ways of doing it. That reflects the institutional setup. We have to also recognize that our people are deeply attached to their national identity, their language, their history, their culture. People do not want to lose that. But on the other hand, as the president said, we absolutely know that as individual countries we are much less powerful, much less capable of delivering for our citizens than when we act together. But you have to demonstrate that case by case and it changes. Who would have thought we would have had common procurement on vaccines until the pandemic came? Now we have to reform our energy market in a way which will be much more integrated because of the war in Ukraine and because of the consequences and for climate change. So it's an evolving process. There will be a tendency if we enlarge further, if we get to, I think it's potential, at the moment it's 10 countries are sort of candidate stages. That takes to 37 countries. That's not going to be a federal state run with a central government. So this balance between doing things collectively at a central level with real institutions, with a rule of law and governance over those institutions but at the same time maximizing the autonomy and the capacity of individual countries to choose their own way of life is the model. Are you okay for about another eight to ten minutes? Because I do want to get to everyone on the floor if you're okay with that, Barbara. There's a lady here just in the third row. And again if you just let us know who you are and where you're from as you pose your question to the panel. Thank you. Thank you so much and thank you for the invite. It's great to be here with European and global friends. My name is Marius Goyd. I'm the Norwegian ambassador. So I'm very happy to partake in this discussion and listen to this speech, which was really, really very good. Norway and the EU enjoys a very close partnership. Of course the EEA is the fundament for this, but we have also 70 other agreements between Norway and the EU. And we are like-minded in foreign policy and security policy and solidarity with Ukraine and so on and so forth. So we share the objectives. We share the visions. We stand solidaric. And we, of course, we are a reliable and predictable partner to the EU not only in the current energy crisis, but also with the visions for the Green Deal in democracy, rule of law. And I would encourage all our EU colleagues to engage with us at the political level, of course, but also at other levels because we need to prepare the decisions. We need to engage in this discussion if you're going to find a way out of the current crisis. I would like to ask the panel how you see Norway as a predictable partner and solid partner to the EU. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ambassador John. Oh, for sure. Norway is a truly important partner. Can you hand up if you'd like to... I'm going to try and keep everyone going while you answer. So put your hand up if you'd like to ask a question. Thank you. I also note that Norway has been incredibly generous to Ukraine looking at financial dispersals and things of that in recent times. I note also that Norway might have been a member. We're coming up to our 50th anniversary membership. Norway had that choice, but, I mean, it's locked into a relationship with the European Union that's very positive for both sides. And I think the Ukraine War has only enhanced all of that. It's not just about Finland and Sweden changing their minds about NATO, Denmark closer to European security policy, opting into that. Norway is also part of this because it's part of that ring of structures that surround the European Union. It's all for the good, in my view. That's great. Have we any more questions from the floor? Don't be shy, this gentleman here in front and actually this gentleman at the back. So we'll take those two, maybe two of the two questions and throw them to the panel. Thanks. Thank you very much. I'm asking a question maybe similar to Norway, but it's with relevance to Ireland. I have four children. They emigrate. They're emigrating during a good time. They emigrate to the Anglo-American countries. They don't emigrate to you reporters as the president said. There's shortage of labour. They're highly skilled. They're from a very good background. And if you're from Balbrigan or Balita Harb, I think if you're going to emigrate, or if you're going to leave the island, the tendency is to go to Anglo-American cultures. So how can we... I'm completely a Farms European, had the pleasure of studying in Newfoundland, lived in Italy. How can we as an island or island contribute more to Europe and get ourselves more in the European vein? Because we might end up becoming a small little talking shop, not really of relevance. I might throw that to you, Bridget Haven, being in Florence and being at the heart of that. We didn't get to everything, but obviously education and skills was a major, major part of this. You said 2023 had to be the year of education and training. So I think the answer to your question is that migration tends to follow migratory pathways. And so if historically, I mean in an earlier period of European history, the Irish went to the continent and then they started to go both to the Anglo world. So I think there's that. I think it's English. It's the ease with which Irish people can rock up to an English speaking country and settle in and there's not just a resistance to language acquisition in Ireland now, the numbers doing French and German are down. And I think that's an enormous problem, not just for us in terms of skills and education, but just culturally. I think just culturally it impoverishes us to be locked predominantly into an Anglo world. But I would say also, don't underestimate the number of Irish people across the continent. I mean there are 50 plus Gaelic football teams on the continent. That means there are a lot of Irish in a lot of places. So I understand the draw of English, but I think there are migratory flows to the continent as well. And very vibrant Irish communities in Brussels, in Italy where I live, the Irish were there too. But I do think language acquisition in our educational system is something. Also for the other big issue for the Irish is the generation, David's generation are leaving or have left the commission and we now need people to take jobs in the institutions who are good enough, have the language skills to get those jobs because if we don't, we lose soft power. And it's of immense importance that Ireland finds it has sufficient numbers of high quality people in the institutions at senior ranks. If we don't, it's a problem. OK, this gentleman here, Charlie, thank you Bridget. Thanks very much and thank you for the event. It's very nice to be out at an in-person event. I keep saying it. I'm going to ask probably a non-fair question given that we've all just heard about the convention and the reform, but would the panel care to speculate on what type of timeline we might be looking at if we're talking about the type of targeted reform potentially that Senator Higgins mentioned or a broader piece? Thank you. David, what do you think just in terms of that? How long is a piece of string? I mean, look, we've been here before. We know that either will be a lot of resistance from Member States because it doesn't really fit with national politics in any country at the moment. Nobody wants to have another referendum on Europe, so there will be resistance. On the other hand, there's an issue there that needs to be addressed and it's not going to go away. So my guess is eventually it will be set up, but it will take time because it will need a moment when people feel we've arrived at a point where you can have this debate nationally and we're not there yet, it's clear. So I will probably talk about several years in my view and certainly before you would get to a text of amending the treaties, you know, that's going to take, this is a medium term project, but I think it's what was significant was that she had the courage to call for it and what impresses me with President von der Leyen is she's more often than not slightly ahead of the posse on a number of issues, on candidacy for Ukraine, on the reform and recovery fund, on the procurement for the pandemic. So she does take some risk because, you know, the member states are not necessarily going to follow you and I've worked with many presidents of the commission. You're always nervous if I go out there and say we should do this and then everyone says no, but she takes some risk and I think today, not only was it a fine speech, but she had the courage to put that out there. It's a controversial issue and it won't immediately take root, but we will remember that this was perhaps the right moment. I think it's already had a desired effect because we're all talking about it, Barbara. Barbara Nona had a European Commission representation here. First of all, I'd like to thank all the audience for coming, our panel. I think I would agree with David that it was, I think, one of the best, the best, if not the best speeches I've seen. I would say that, wouldn't I? In the immortal words of Mandy Rice-Davies or whoever said it. But I do think that it was a courageous speech. I think it struck the right tone. I'd just like to come back, John, on what you said. In fact, I'm reading the line here, so I want the people of the western Balkans of Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia to know you are part of our family, your future is in our union and our union is not complete without you. So she did mention it. I think to be fair, she is probably, she's been really at the forefront of recognising the importance of the western Balkans and the importance of bringing them into the European family and stabilising the situation. So I think, you know, she's sort of stuck her neck out, if you like, on that at a time when maybe other heads of state and government aren't so convinced that this is the right time. Exactly, the problem is within the council. I am determined to get you out by 9.40. So very, very quickly, I'm going to go to the panel. We're midterm, but it's a term like no other. So just maybe just from each of you to some concluding remarks before we bring the event to a close. I think she's been a very good president. I think putting climate change at the heart of the commission's programme was the right thing to do. We've seen it replicated in the COVID recovery funds. Climate change spending is about a third or more of what governments are spending. But to go back to our last point, there's only so much that the commission can do. It can set the agenda. There are policy proposals out there as it did with the energy proposals last week. But as ever within the union, a system of divided government, it is very, very difficult to reconcile even within the council 27 different national positions and then to match the ambition that's often put out there by a commission president in these proposals. I think it's more or less a positive report card at halftime. For you, Alice Murray. I'm making sure that those wider frames that go wider than the EU, the human rights frame, for example, that that is kept peace. Migration was mentioned in that. I thought it was interesting. There's going to be negotiations around the migration pact for the next four presidencies. It's not just Ukraine. That idea of that being a model was very interesting to me in terms of does that mean that we're putting a kind of human centre? That came out of the future of Europe very strongly. Then within our energy policy again, climate, so you have to look to those things that we can do in terms of in Europe but that we frame it within that wider human rights frame internationally and within the wider, existential is overused, not in terms of climate crisis. It is in that sense. I think that's crucial. There are a lot of battle still, the hydrogen strategy. Is that going to be green hydrogen or is it going to be a last other pass for the gas industry? I don't understand what she said but I did think it was a strong speech and I think it opened up and made clear lots of key decision points and I think it will be over the next year in six months that we see unpack what the different arguments are within them. David, at the State of the Union it is sort of something of a US import but how important do you think it is for the legislative agenda and when she's talking about new iterations of the CHIPS Act for lithium, for other critical materials what do you think are the chances of realistically implementing many of the things she outlined today? If you watch the State of the Union speech in America it's an event in and of itself it tends not to have much of an impact afterwards it's a media show. She has borrowed some of the elements the special guests they are trying to make it personal the reference to the two Polish girls and their work for refugees but I think she has announced that this commission has honestly produced fantastic output under huge pressure and I honestly think they have delivered I think the challenge the tectonic plates are shifting internationally and we have to define what that means for the EU 27 what it means for our neighbourhood those of our neighbours who never want to be members the UK, Norway, Switzerland but who are still strong partners those of our neighbours who want to join and how do we manage that and how do we then fit internationally United States, China, Russia obviously in a very difficult place at the moment this is the challenge and at the same time meeting the issue of climate change which is the single greatest challenge we face and I think this commission has done a good job of framing that then can we agree at 27 often than not yes but never quite to the level of expectation which is made in the speech and the last word to you, Brittany Latham so I think we haven't spoken at all about the fact she's a woman and I think that has really mattered to her commission she's the first woman president of the European Commission but much more it's the tone she strikes she at ease talks about children she humanises it and I think that's been really important for this phase of European integration so I think the fact she's a woman has actually had an impact on matters not just symbolically but much more substantially and that is where you began indeed at the beginning you were talking about tone and that is all way of time for I want to on your behalf to thank Maria Alice, David, Bridget and John and thank you to our hosts obviously the European Commission the European Parliament leads an office and it's great to be with you all again finally thanks to you all for turning out in person and all of those hundreds of you on YouTube so thank you and that brings to a close the state of the EU 22