Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome back to Chatham House, I think for some of you this is the second meeting I’ve had the pleasure of hosting here in our hall at Chatham House since, let’s call it the latest phase of COVID. So I’m very pleased to welcome those members who’ve been able to come and join us physically here in the room, and I also, obviously, want to welcome the large number of our members who are joining us online. And it’s great to have the mix of both sets of participants and the opportunity this will give us today for a conversations with Monsieur Michel Barnier. Michel, welcome to London, on our behalf at least. Wonderful to have you with us. I will introduce Michel Barnier in more detail in a second and…
Michel Barnier
Briefly.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Briefly, I’ll be brief. There’s a lot to say, but I’ve been condensing, as I’ve gone along, but I did want to just want to just remind everyone of the process. For those of you in the room, thank you, you’re all wearing your masks, please keep your masks on, unless you’re asking a question. And when it comes to asking a question, just stay in your seats, you can take your mask down and somebody will come with a boom microphone, so you can ask your question. Obviously, those of you who are joining this meeting online, if you want to ask questions and get them in whenever you want, we will certainly have plenty of time for questions, please use the Q&A function on your Zoom app, and don’t use the chat function for that, because we won’t be monitoring it for that purpose. Ask your question, and if you don’t want to ask the question live, let us know in that little Q&A box, and I can ask the question on your behalf, but otherwise we can unmic you and let you ask the question yourself to Monsieur Barnier. I think that’s it in terms of practical stuff. Oh, and it’s on the record. I was saying to Michel earlier Barnier before. He said, “Is this under the rule?” I said, “No, this is definitely one of our public meetings. We’re doing it on the record, and that gives us chance for the maximum number of people to take advantage of it and to draw on the comments you’re going to be making today.”
Where do we start with Michel Barnier? The reason he’s here in London, originally, I think I could say, but we’ll come to this maybe in a minute, was very much to talk about his book, My Secret Brexit Diary, is its title here in the UK, which came out pretty much four months after the UK actually left formally, fully the EU at the beginning of this year, and along the way, we have an additional reason to be very pleased that you’ve joined us, Monsieur Barnier, because you are standing as a candidate to be nominated for La République in the upcoming French elections next year. I believe there is now a date set for the primary in December. So, we will have an opportunity also to ask you a few questions about French politics and where that’s going and your perspective on that front as well.
But obviously, we’re starting really from the point of view of Michel Barnier’s great experience having led on the EU’s behalf its negotiation with the UK, both for its withdrawal agreement and for its future relationship agreement, the so-called Trade and Co-operation Agreement. And in picking Michel Barnier, Jean-Claude Juncker was quite intelligent, I suppose, in that sense. He picked somebody with double type of experience. Somebody deeply steeped in national politics, where Monsieur Barnier got involved in the National Assembly in 1978 representing the region of Savoie, which you’re very, very connected to. One of the, certainly at the time, youngest members of the National Assembly, 27 years old, yeah?
Michel Barnier
The youngest is a title you lose very quickly.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
But then you can come back as well, you get a second go to do it as well. But he then managed to serve as a Minister four times, under various Presidents. I won’t go through them all, but Minister for the Environment, Minister for Europe, Minister of Foreign Affairs and also Minister of Agriculture, maybe the most important pole.
Michel Barnier
And Fisheries.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
And Fisheries, Agriculture and Fisheries.
Michel Barnier
No, don’t forget the fisheries.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
I – definitely in the current context, we’d better not forget it. But also, twice served as European Commissioner, between 2000 – 1999 and 2004, as European Commissioner in Charge of Regional Policy, and then again after Jean-Claude Juncker won, he became European Commissioner in Charge of Internal Market and Financial Services, taking over literally as the global financial crisis really hit Europe, right at the beginning, yes, 2009.
Michel Barnier
At that time, the most dangerous man of Europe.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
You were, goodness.
Michel Barnier
Yes, sure.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
That was a British perspective, wasn’t it?
Michel Barnier
For some British.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
For some British people. I remember our headlines are always very kind to French Politicians.
Michel Barnier
I’m not sure it was true, but it was written.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Maybe we’ll be the judge at the end of this conversation on that. And then, obviously, I won’t go through, because we’ll be talking about it, he was appointed, literally early in 2016, by Jean-Claude Juncker, to lead, as I said, the negotiations. So, Michel Barnier, fantastic to have you with us, a little bit of the history of your role, and your roles in France and in the EU. I have a first obvious question, and actually, it’s connected to the book, because when I held it up here, it says, My Secret Brexit Diary. Now, I feel the British publishers have gone to town on this. In France, it’s headline is, La Grande Illusion, The Great Illusion, and those Chatham House experts here amongst our members will know that was also the title of a 19 – book by Norman Angell, who was based at Chatham House in the 1920s and early 30s, writing about the risks of the Second World War. And I suppose my question is, I understand My Secret Brexit Diary, but why did you pick the subtitle, The Great Illusion, in writing this four year history of your time negotiating Brexit?
Michel Barnier
Robin, first of all, thank you very much for your kind words and good evening to all of you and to the people online also, and thank you very much to Chatham House for your kind invitation. I’m very honoured to take part in this conversation. In fact, my Editor in the UK, and I want to thank my Editor at Polity, saw that it was more direct and more clear to do this title of My Secret Brexit Diary, but in French or in the French edition, I’ve chosen to focus on the great illusion, and I – in the very first pages I mention the fact that it was the title of a very famous film of the genre noir, but also, I mention the fact that Norman Angell wrote a book a long time ago, before the First World War, which had the same title. So, no link with these two, film or book, and the situation has definitely been different, the context is different.
Why the great illusion? In fact, there are several illusions through the Brexit story. The first illusion is, for me, definitely the fact that we can be stronger alone, in the global world we face today, faced all the challenges, we have to have in front of us. I think, as a French Britisher, as a Gaullist, that it’s better to be together than alone. It’s my personal opinion, and I think it’s an illusion that, to think the contrary. The second illusion is for the Brits at the beginning of the negotiation to think that they could have better results in the negotiation by dividing the EU. It was an illusion, and they didn’t understand clearly that I was not the Lead Negotiator of the Commission, but also, at the same time, with the same mandate, of the 27 Head of States and the European Parliament. It was a second illusion.
And the third illusion is more on our side, if I may, the illusion that an event, a political event, which seems to be unlikely, could never happen. The proof has been given by the Brits, a majority, 52% of British citizens, but something which is unlikely, even for the people launching the campaign, the Brexit, could happen. And now in relation to – it’s too late for the UK, but not too late for the others, be careful. Draw the lessons. In the first chapter of my book, The Warning, too late for you, for your country, but not too late for us, be careful. Something which seemed to be unlikely could happen.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
And of those illusions, and we could maybe unpack each one, and the last one, I think, is – it strikes me, maybe connected to your current involvement in French politics. But this idea of not being able to divide the EU, one thing that’s very clear in your book is the extent to which you spent a lot of time at the beginning travelling around the EU Member States.
Michel Barnier
At the beginning, yeah.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Before the negotiation started.
Michel Barnier
I was on the road.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yeah, all the way through.
Michel Barnier
Every week, at least one time, very often two times, I was visiting one capital, meeting the Prime Minister, the President, meeting the National Parliament, meeting the trade unions. And I request a meeting, the business community and the key Ministers, and I have travelled, if I may say, visit one capital per week.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Throughout the negotiations, is what you’re saying, yeah?
Michel Barnier
All along the negotiations, except during the COVID crisis, obviously. But it is not only a key of the unity, yeah? If I may say, huh? The first key, the first reason of the trust of the 27 member states of the European Parliament, towards my team and myself perhaps, has been a very unusual method of transparency in Brussels, thanks to the trust and the support of Jean-Claude Juncker. It was not so easy with a demonstration of the coalition, but Jean-Claude Juncker himself support my request to use, from the day one until the day – the last day, total transparency. So, once again, it is very unusual in Brussels. We have said everything on every issue to everybody at the same time. And practically, that means that in Brussels, we have organised the work of the 27 member states through a special group of 27 Brexit delegates, meeting twice per week, and my team, one or two Deputy, Sabine, Stéphanie, or Clara and Polina, for the two negotiations, having supporting. And the reason of the state negotiation is the fact that two women, there are two strong women on my side, all of the time. Not the same women, but two very tandem?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yes, exactly, in tandem.
Michel Barnier
A competent presence. One or two of my Deputy went one or two times per week, to say, to speak with this Brexit directly and to tell them exactly the same things about every subject and every issue of the negotiation at the same time. So we spoke, at the same time, to the German Chancellor and to the President of – the Prime Minister of Malta, and it was, Robin, the first and the main reason of the trust. And we have done this method all along the road during four years.
And the third, if I may say, the third reason that the unity of the 27, the reason why I spoke about an illusion on the UK side to try to divide us, to get a better result, was something which is a paradox, linked to the unanimity. The unanimity has been the leverage of the unity. No result was possible for this negotiation without the unanimity of the 27. That means simply that the one concern of one member state was necessarily the concern of the 26 others. If this would have been not the case, would have been no result. So, all along the road, I tried to listen, to understand the concern, the main concern of the member states, and the first and the most legitimate and the most sensitive was obviously, and still is, the peace in Ireland. But also fishery, for eight member states, the British bases in Cyprus, Gibraltar for Spain, the role of the airport of Helsinki for Finland, the question of the visas for Bulgaria and Romania. Every main and key concern for one member state became the concern of 26 others. Every one for all, and it was the third leverage of unity.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Do you think, with hindsight, that in a way you were too successful? By that I mean that you…
Michel Barnier
Sorry, I don’t like the word ‘successful’ for this negotiation.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yeah, I’m sorry.
Michel Barnier
The Brexit is a divorce. I have no personal experience, my wife is here, Isabelle. Fortunately, I have no experience of divorce, but many friends of mine have this experience, and I never listen that divorce is a successful, if I may say. So, it was a result. So I don’t – sorry, but I am always – I have this reaction. To say that we cannot speak about success. At the end, many people said ‘congratulations’. I don’t want to be congratulated for a divorce, sorry, yeah?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
But in your – no, the thing that we’re most conscious of in the United Kingdom is maybe less the – what you were able to secure on visas or what you were able to secure for the airbases in Cyprus and so on, but it’s the way that the Northern Ireland question, in a way, came to dominate the whole aspect of the negotiation. Every – our Northern Irish Protocol became the prism through which the entire negotiation ended up getting captured. And in a way, by being one for all and all for one and one for all, did it create almost a level of consolidation on the EU side, that the UK side was never going to be able to meet? As you note in your book, the UK side was almost at civil war through a long period of the process, amongst the Brexiteers in the government, while you were taking a lot of time to make sure that the EU was very solid and stable. Might have been better if there’d been more flexibility on the EU side, to kind of, almost go with the British side, try to tease them out. That’s what I meant by ‘too successful’.
Michel Barnier
Let me record that the Irish issue has been tackled and solved, in my view, with a balanced protocol, not at the end of the negotiations, but one year and a half before. We are – in fact, we have negotiated two treaties, yeah? The first one, and what I called political and institutional divorce, and Brexit, the first political institution, Brexit, concluded in November 19, and we succeed with the Brits, with Boris Johnson, not without him, not against him, but with him, with Boris Johnson and his team, which was a very professional team. We succeed to find a solution to put again certainties, a certain level of certainties, where the certainty, where the Brexit creates so many answer to this. Citizens, almost six million people have been recognised their rights on both sides. Six million people for the moment today.
The financial provisions where we agree with the Brits that everything decided by28 will be paid at 28. And finally, Ireland, where we finally found a compromise, I think a dynamic compromise, with Boris Johnson, to find a solution on many very sensitive programme, huh? And if I may say, along this road, I kept in my mind three main concern, and I did a conclusion in my book.
First of all, to defend the interest of the EU and the unity of the EU. It was my duty and my responsibility. Number two, the peace in Ireland. Number three, best spirit as possible between the UK and EU, and preserve, and to build a future relationship, because I think, I thought, I still think, I will think in any case, that to face so many challenges in front of us, terrorism, climate change, migration, financial stability, or the risk of the new financial crisis, we need and we will need to work to deserve the Brits.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
So why has the Northern Irish Protocol gone so wrong? Because if it does go as wrong as it seems to be right now, and the government may call…
Michel Barnier
I’m not sure that I’m the right person to ask for, huh?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
You’re not so right – not so certain what?
Michel Barnier
I’m not sure to be the right person on expression, huh?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Well, you’re as knowledgeable as anyone of what’s inside that agreement.
Michel Barnier
No, no, no, I can give you my opinion, but…
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yes, sure, that’s all I’m asking for.
Michel Barnier
But this protocol has been negotiated line-by-line, word-by-word, by the Prime Minister of UK, the current Prime Minister of UK. He knows perfectly what he signed at that time. There is no surprise.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
But this is…
Michel Barnier
So, now, we have to be responsible on both sides. We have to be very, very prudent, and to take care, because what is at stake in Ireland, Northern Ireland, is not about goods or trade or technical economy, it’s about peace, about peace. And I will never forget my meeting with a few number of women in Donegal, South of Derry and Londonderry, working on both sides, thanks to the budget or the funds of the EU, and this meeting, which was a private meeting, was very moving. And these women didn’t – if I be frank with you, these women gave me at that time a, kind of, mandate, which is what they said, as a mandate for me. It was the people on the ground, and they told me, these women, very moving, “Please, you have to do everything you can to avoid that this situation begin again.” But I will never forget these women, and what is at stake is peace in Ireland, yeah?
So I think that we have to be careful, and what I recommend now, I don’t know what could happen in the next few days or few weeks, but just to be careful, because what we have written, what we have agreed, can be delivered, if we make any thought on both sides to avoid any, kind of, dramatization of the situation. We have to dedramatize the situation.
I never spoke about border of the sea, never. I just spoke about checks and control. Why? Because, for instance, I have been the French Minister for Agriculture, a cow, une vache, a cow, huh? A cow, entering from England in Belfast, the same country, is entering in France. The day this cow arrives in Belfast, this cow is entering in France or in Germany or in Belgium, if there is no border. So we have to control. Even for a very simple reason, which is the fact that the island of Ireland is a single epidemiologic zone. So what is at stake is also the sanitary situation and the situation of the people. So, we have to control the part of the goods coming from England to Northern Ireland, part of these goods passing by Dublin, and we can control. But he part, 40, 45% is coming directly to Belfast. We just want to take the precaution to have control, to protect the single market, and to protect also, the citizens.
And I – just let me, this point is very important. When I met the DUP leaders, the meeting with the DUP leaders was always stimulating, yeah? But I remember one of these meeting with Arlene Foster, and Mrs Dodd and Mr Dodd, and I asked Mr Dodd – at that time he was a Member of the House of Commons – “Do you recognise that we have” – it was just after the Brexit, but a long time before the conclusion, “Do you recognise that we have already such control and checks in Belfast? For instance, for the part of the animals or the part of the vegetables?” And his answer was yes. So, before the Brexit, we had such control and checks at the technical level and at the rational level in Belfast, for the reason I mentioned. So I – if we make any thought to dedramatize, to avoid the passions, the ideology, rhetoric, I think we can find a way to implement this protocol, signed and ratified by the House of Commons, ratified by the majority of the House of Commons, and signed by the Prime Minister of the UK, we can implement this protocol in the best way. And on the European side, I’m no longer in office, but the Vice President of the Commission, Maroš Šefčovič, is a very wise man, competent man. Maroš Šefčovič is ready to find in the framework of the protocol, I repeat, in the framework of the protocol, we are ready to find the best operational and practical solution for the concern of the UK. But everybody has to be careful and responsible.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
And I don’t want to – as with the negotiation…
Michel Barnier
No problem at all.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
No, no, but it was important, and you had many, many key elements for what – as we could end up dominating this conversation, as the Brexit negotiation was with the Northern Irish thing. I think the surprise to the British side was that there had been understanding that certain goods that were not considered likely to be exported on from Northern Ireland would be on some type of fast track arrangement, and there was an expectation that the element of control that you rightly describe would be very targeted…
Michel Barnier
I’m sure that…
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
…and the impression is now it’s very broad.
Michel Barnier
I’m sure we can find for objective reasons and for this issue, a practical reason, for instance, for medicine and so on. I’m sure we can find – I’m no longer in office, Doctor, I don’t want to speak in the name of the Commission, but I’m sure we can find – the team are the same, and we can find the solutions. But please, please, sticking to the mandate given by these women, not only to me, but also to the British Government, please, we have to be careful. And please, we have to be responsible and to find the solution without drama. And I think – what I think, what I’m careful about, exactly what is thinking also in Washington by many people, even by the President of the United States and by many people in Europe.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
We’ve got lots of questions coming in, so I’m just going to do one more maybe now, and then let – bring in some of the questions from our many members and guests who are joining us online. And I’ve got so many, I’m not – I’ll save some of the other ones up for later on. Let me ask one question. How do you think Brexit has changed France’s approach to European integration? Has it changed France’s perspective of what European integration is about, the relationships it has? Does France look at EU integration differently now that Britain’s no longer in there?
Michel Barnier
You are speaking of France, not France…?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
France specifically, not [inaudible – 33:34] France.
Michel Barnier
I don’t think that – what is at stake now, what is the level of trust and confidence between us, to be the future relation, that Brexit is done. One key issue for us in France, but also for Netherlands, for Belgium, for Ireland, is about the right implementation of what we have agreed with the Brits, not only on the peace in Ireland, but also on fishery, if this point is important, we expect the same responsibility of the UK to respect its signature and this point is not a minor one.
Please, this point is politically important, to have the base of trust and confidence for everything else. So if I may say, I don’t know yet what will be my role in France, the next few months, and since next April, we will see, it depends on the French people, but in any case, the new President of France will be very concerned by the level of trust between the UK and France. There isn’t a respect of this Brexit agreement. And we have so many reason to co-operate, if we are clever, and if we are receipt, I don’t know the word, unrealistic, realistic if you look at the world as it is, the open eyes, huh? Please, we have so many reasons to co-operate.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Well, we have – one question here’s from an anonymous attendee, so I can’t get them to ask the question, but specifically asks “What do you think the future prospects are for UK-EU defence co-operation, one item that was not included in the overall future agreement?” What’s your personal perspective, and maybe, if I may say, your French perspective as well? ‘Cause we have a bilateral agreement and so on.
Michel Barnier
I’ve always been very interested by this serious issue of defence. Let me recall that – remember that what is written in the treaty today, the European treaty, is issued of a working group I chaired at that time, in the Convention, writing the famous Constitution, that what is written in the Treaty, the Lisbon Treaty, about the higher representative, the structured co-operation in defence, the defence fund, the cause of solidarity, is directly – has been directly proposed by a group I chaired on defence, European defence, ten years ago. Number one and number two, I worked a lot at the side of Jean-Claude Juncker as a Special Advisor for Defence, before becoming the Negotiator. I had been the French Minister for Foreign Affairs, obviously, interested by all the step we can have in front of us, to improve a common defence policy and first of all, a common vision of what we can do together. I am not in favour of this rhetoric of – about a European Army. It’s not realistic, but I think we have – we have a mini-step to – a mini proposal to put in place and to implement in the defence policy.
The paradox, ask – answering to your question, is that the UK refused to engage on this issue, huh, despite the fact that in the political declaration, I mentioned several times this document that Boris Johnson did not recognise, after he has signed the document, he negotiated the document also. But in this document we have mentioned clearly the fact that the mandate for the new relationship, the second negotiation from February 2020 until the end of 2020, this political [inaudible – 38:13] mentioned clearly the fact that we were open, at that time on both sides, to negotiate on a framework for defence co-operation and external security. And finally, the UK, the Brits, they decided not to negotiate, so the door remained open.
I am sure, Robin, I am sure that we will need a common framework to organise co-operation in that field. If the UK finds and decide to take part to an external operation the EU. It happened in the past, and with success, the operation had to [inaudible – 38:52] driver, driven by the UK, chaired by the UK, was a great success.
I am sure that, unfortunately, we will have to organise such an operation in the UK, could – it will be the choice of the UK to take part. We need a framework to organise the co-operation between the services. We need a framework to organise the link between the UK as a third country, with our new form for defence, or the link from the UK with the structured co-operation we have launched. So we need this framework, and I hoped it was possible during the negotiation. I was ready to negotiate and very interesting by this part of the negotiation also, but unfortunately, it was not possible. So the door is open.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
The door is open, good. Look, I want to bring you somebody in first. Nicholas Webb, I think, has an interesting question as well, sort of, to do with the negotiation, then I’m going to move on more into the future, including your role. Nicholas, so are you there, ‘cause we’d love to hear your question? Nicholas Webb.
Nicholas Webb
Thank you, and despite the vast array of disagreement, was there any aspect of the Brexit movement, which you admired or caused you to think critically about the EU in a way that you perhaps had not done before? Thank you.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
So, was there anything about – during the Brexit negotiation, that made you think more critically about the EU than you did before? In other words, you’ve talked about how successful the negotiation was, but as you were doing the negotiation, did you think to yourself, “Hold on, maybe the Brexit movement has something correct”? Or did it reveal a weakness about the EU and did it…
Michel Barnier
No.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
…make you think differently?
Michel Barnier
Despite my personal faults, I still not understand the reason of the Brexit, yeah. And, to be frank, I listened carefully to everybody in the UK, including Mr Farage. He asked me for a meeting in my office, it was cordial, and he give me no proof of the added value of the Brexit. And well, seriously, at the end of this meeting, I ask him, “Mr Farage, now Brexit is there, almost there, we are going to finalise the treaty, so you won, okay. Can you tell me, how do you see the future relation between EU and UK?” It was a simple question, and his answer was very clear and immediate. “Mr Barnier, after Brexit, the EU will no longer exist.” This guy want to destroy the EU. No way, huh? No way. So – but he did not bring to me any, kind of, proof of the added value of Brexit. The Brexit is lose-lose, once again. The Brexit is lose-lose for both sides. So…
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
So it reinforced it rather than…
Michel Barnier
But to answer to Nicholas, if I understand it correctly, I’m not sure of his questions. I didn’t understand the added value of the Brexit, because I think there is no added value for both sides. But I tried to understand the reason for the vote, and it’s exactly what I tried to write in my book, in the first chapter, The Warning. There is – there are obviously domestic and very British reason to Brexit. I don’t want to comment this way. But there are also reason in the region of UK, what I call the social anger, the feeling that the EU do not protect the citizens, the – a popular feeling against the lack of future, the lack of jobs, the lack of public services, the lack of industry.
On this point, there is some similar problem in France, because our two countries have, in parallel, made the main choice to focus their economy on services and to abandon the part of their industry. That’s not the case in Germany, not the case in Italy, not the case in Sweden, and nobody ask in Brussels to us to abandon our industry, but we have the same problem, for so the reason – and I want to continue this work and this observation and to draw the lessons. My duty is to tell. We have to listen, to understand, and to answer. All the answers are not in Brussels. But part of the answer are in Brussels, less bureaucracy, less naivete in our trade relations, new ambition for industry, a more efficient policy for migrations. There is many things, and this movement begin in Brussels for the last four years, I think so.
Part of the answer are in London or in Paris or in Rome, and part of their answers are also at the regional level. But as far as Brussels is concerned, I will continue to ask and to act for us to draw the lessons of the Brexit.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Good, ‘cause I think there’s one lesson that maybe is referred to in the next question I’m going to take from James Crisp. James, if you could introduce yourself and who you work for as well, that’d be great. If we’ve got you there, James Crisp? If not, I will answer…
Michel Barnier
It’s a pity, huh?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
No, I’ve got the question, I’ll ask it for him. James, are you not there? So, James Crisp, I will ask his question, is with The Telegraph, but he asks the question, which I’m sure is on many people’s lips, “Isn’t your call for a French opt out from European Court of Justice oversight on immigration cherry picking? So are you advocating cherry picking on French immigration policy?
Michel Barnier
No, please, please, we have to be serious, so, we have to be precise. If I come back on the Brexit, and the reason of Mr Farage or Mr Johnson and some others, they want to leave the EU, and they succeed to leave the EU, it has been and will be – it is not, it will never be my case, and my position, never. Number two, leaving the EU, they want to end the freedom of movement. It’s exactly the contrary for me, yeah? I want to maintain and protect the freedom of movement with a key – the key success and the key asset, thanks to the single market, the freedom of movement. So, I have nothing to do with the British position on this point. So what I just tried to say, drawing the lesson from the Brexit and what I saw, what I see in my country, is to build an efficient national policy for immigration, for coming from the third country, from outside of Europe, it is a point. And I just record that the migration policy is a shared competence between the EU and between the member states. So, there is a margin for national answers respecting the national priorities and there is no contradiction for the same – in the same time for us, for the new French President to build a more efficient common European policy for immigration. So it is exactly the reason why I have proposed this moratoire – moratorium?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yeah, moratorium.
Michel Barnier
…for three or four years, but just – I want just to remember the – in a few years ago, Germany decided exactly the same, kind of, moratorium for the family reunion, and I did not see at that time any protest or – please, let me tell you, James Crisp and the other, that I have not changed. I am European, and I have been a European before many people in Brussels, and I will remain a European after them. I’m a patriotic person. I am a Gaullist, and I am European at the same time, huh? But European in addition to being patriotic, yeah? But exactly because I – my difference with many of these people in Brussels, that I have managed the Brexit team, and I – if, in Brussels, these people think that there is nothing to change, everything is perfect, they are wrong. I don’t want another Brexit out – as well. I don’t want.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
But isn’t the danger – sorry, I’ll just tack on my own question on this. Isn’t the danger that’s facing the European Union now less to do with people wanting to leave, than people – and you say you’re not in favour of leaving, obviously – the danger is what happens inside? There’s a lot of criticism of the Polish Government for saying, “Our National Parliament should be able to adjudicate at what level the European Court of Justice does or does not have authority.” And the reason your comments about immigration, I think, jumped out at people so much, is that it wasn’t Brexity, it was more the, kind of, sovereignty argument we’re hearing in certain Central European governments, the Hungarian Government, the Polish Government, “We need to define how far the ECJ can go, and we need to reclaim more legal sovereignty for ourselves.” Is that not a risk to the future cohesion of the European Union?
Michel Barnier
Look, I am very moved by the attention to the Brits, the cohesion of the EU, huh?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
We’re all Europeans.
Michel Barnier
Sure, sure, no, no, I’m very – and very stimulating for me. But let us now find a way and change what needs to be changed, to find the right balance. There is no question for me to put at risk or to put into question the role of the Court of Justice or the Convention of the European – the Human Rights. The fact is, in my country, for the moment, we have no reference in the Constitution to the migration problem. So we want to have this for France, as many other countries, and not working only with the caselaw, if I may say, of the European institution or the European – or the national institution. We need to have our own reference. But at the same time, we will find the right solution in a very – with humanity and with rigour.
In France, we will work to build the more efficient European policy for migration, Dublin, Schengen, and the border. And the third point of my proposal, which is a serious proposal, I work with the expert of the Constitutional Council in France, the Conseil d’État, I am a member of the Conseil d’État, and from expert for Europe, the third point of this time of moratoire or moratorium, will be to negotiate with the third country from where the migrant are coming from, when I spoke about economic migrant.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
So it was exactly the economic side was the most important. I want to call on a couple of – we’ve got a lot of questions coming in, and I’m going to take two questions very quickly, if I may. One is going to be from Oded Mayer, they are very topical issues at the moment, and the other’s going to be from Samantha. Where are you Samantha? Here, Samantha de Bendern. So, in whichever order my colleagues can call them up. Oded Mayer may be first, and then Samantha de Bendern. We can hear both of your questions. They’re very specific. They play more to your Foreign Minister role. Colleagues, call one or the other up, please? Let me know who’s coming first.
Oded Mayer
Can you hear me?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yes, who’s that?
Oded Mayer
It’s Oded Mayer.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Okay, Oded, please go ahead and ask your question.
Oded Mayer
Yes, and first of all, thank you for taking my question, it’s a very short one. It will be interesting to have Mr Barnier’s take on the Aukus Agreement with Australia and the US and the subsequent French reaction to it?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
That’s one question, and the French reaction, and what you think of the deal between the UK, US and Australia? And could we call up Samantha as well now? Samantha, are you there? Can we…?
Samantha de Bendern
Yes, hello, can you hear me?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Perfectly.
Samantha de Bendern
Yes, hello, I’m calling from France, and I’m an Associate in the Russia Eurasia Programme at Chatham House. And I’ve done a lot of work on Russia’s interference in Brexit, and particularly how this fits into Russia’s overall foreign policy goal of weakening the EU. Now, next year’s elections in France are an obvious target for Russian interference, and particularly an anti-EU President could potentially deal a fatal blow to the EU. Do you feel that the French mainstream political establishment is sufficiently aware of the scale of the threat, and is this of a concern to you personally, you know, in view of your own Presidential ambitions? Et bonne chance pour le [mother tongue – 53:52].
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
So a question, yeah, one about Russia, one about Aukus.
Michel Barnier
A good conclusion, huh?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
She came too early in this thing, we’ve still got ten minutes, unfortunately.
Michel Barnier
No, no. Thank you, Samantha, I can be brief on your questions, and thank you for the warning. We all saw what happened during the referendum, the campaign and what could be the interference from outside. I don’t want to comment more than that, what happened in this country. But for my country, speaking about interference from different parts of the world, not only Russia, we are informed and we are not naïve. I want to come to the – and – but – and thank you for your warning.
On this situation with Australia, but more than Australia, with United States and with your country. We are very disappointed, on the French side, and I share this disappointment and this disappointment is very serious, very serious. And why? Because apart the specific point of this contract cancelled by Australia, there is a point – there is a problem of trust and confidence between allies.
I approve, as a French Britisher and the fact that my country came back in the integrated command of NATO, without any ambiguity. But being allies at that level means trust and confidence, and the behaviour of the UK Government, the behaviour of the Australian Government, the behaviour of the Washington Government, were not correct, first. So, the trust and the confidence we need between allies has been fragilized, and we are very – with calm, with responsibility, to look at the situation and to look what could be the consequences. Let me just say that, in my view, an alliance cannot mean allegiance, never, never.
I think that the common interest is for the NATO to be solid on two legs, and I try to speak about the common interest for the medium and long-term. I often recall speaking with the Brexit and what I see as the right way to work in politics, as sentence pronounced by a very respectful stateman in France, coming from the left side, Pierre Mendès France. He said in one speech, to the youth people in France, “Never sacrifice the future to the present. Never sacrifice the future to the present.” This is my answer.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
A very clear one. I want to – we’re coming down towards the end now. I want to bring in Nicholas Siegler next. Nicholas, hopefully you’re there, ‘cause I think it’s a question really about French-UK relations in particular, which builds on this, but let’s see how you ask you question. Nicholas, over to you.
Nicholas Siegler
Thank you. I’d just like to ask you, how do you think EU-UK relations will change when you become President of France?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
There we go.
Michel Barnier
Thank you for the encouragement. I’m very happy to believe, huh? But I receive also many encouragements in my country, fortunately. The key point, Nicholas, is just for me to repeat, the third concern along this negotiation was to preserve, for me, the good spirit of a future co-operation, in the French way, because the UK is no longer in the EU, no longer in the single market, no longer linked to the foreign policy, but we have to rebuild and to build with other tools, and another different framework, this relation, because it is our common interest for the stability of this continent, and for the progress of the citizens. So, as a new French President, I will clearly take into account this conviction as a frame for the future, and try to look at the future, despite the difficulty of the present situation.
One point, if I may say, would be, coming back to a previous point, the fact that the UK will take its responsibility and respect its signature for Ireland, the protocol in Ireland, and for fishery. These two points are important for France today and for the new President of France. And after, I hope the reason we’d come back with calm, and we are ready to work in the same spirit, I think we will have to rebuild the trust. But for the moment, to be frank, I’m – I have a lot of concern, huh, and I’m not the only one in France. There is too many points of disappointment from our side, yeah? I think it could be difficult.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yeah, and I would say that the feeling might be – I’ll say it now, and you can answer it if you want, mutual, in the sense there is a suspicion and a sense that France is also blocking a few things, Horizon, participation programmes. There’s a sense of mutual suspicion, but please don’t answer that just yet. I’ve realised I’ve been doing a lot of questions on here, let me get a few from the floor and then…
Michel Barnier
We can discuss about this point, huh?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yeah, and if you just give me one second, let me get a few from the floor first. At the back, here, and here, I’ll take these three, yeah.
Hans Kundnani
Thanks, Hans Kundnani from Chatham House. I thought that the way you started it, discussing – can you hear me?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
The far left. Yeah, we can hear you perfectly, we were just trying to see you.
Hans Kundnani
Okay. The discussion at the beginning about the grand illusion was interesting because the whole point was that Norman Angell was wrong, and the illusion was not an illusion. That was the whole, kind of, point. But I wanted to come back to this question of some of the things you’ve been saying in your Presidential campaign around legal sovereignty and around a suspension of immigration from the outside of the EU. I think to some people this sounded not so much as a, sort of, Brexity kind of thing, as more of a far right thing, even though, as you say, you’re pro-European. But if what you’re saying – if I understood you correctly now, you’re saying the difference between you and the Brexiteers is that you’re in favour in reforming freedom of movement in order to save it, whereas the Brexiteers wanted to end freedom of movement. If that’s right, then presumably David – you have some sympathy for David Cameron, who tried to do precisely the same thing, to get a reform of freedom of movement in order for Britain to stay within the UK. Surely you have some sympathy with him?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
So, can – oh, we’ll take them – do you want to take them as a group, or one at a time?
Michel Barnier
No, I could try to answer.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yeah, yeah.
Michel Barnier
I have nothing to do with the extreme right, nothing. So, be serious, please, and just ask for a little respect of my position, huh? You’d never find any point of proximity between me and the extreme right, never, in your country or in my country, never, never. I just try to look at the problems and to find a correct solution, precisely for to avoid the solutions of the extreme right in my country, would be implemented. I prefer to tackle the problem and to find solutions. And all along my life, my political life, which is in a certain sense is longer, you can have the proof of what I said, that I tried to look at the problems and to find solutions.
Exactly what I did with my team for your Irish case, looking at the problem created by the Brexit, and finding solutions for this problem. That’s the reason why in Ireland, I just can make this point, the problem is not the protocol. The protocol is a solution to the problem created by Brexit. So, the sympathy, which Cameron raised, is not at stake, it’s that – but my answer is this one. I tried to find solutions and it’s too late to come back. Let me just record one point about Cameron. We agreed with Cameron a few months before the Brexit referendum, on the document, and the British Government, chaired by Cameron, agreed on this document, and we agreed with him, huh?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yeah, and he maybe thought he could have asked for more on immigration, but he didn’t. Yeah, please, at the front, and I’ll take these two together, ‘cause I’m just conscious of time.
John Wilson
John Wilson. If Nicola Sturgeon and her SNP Party is successful in winning a second referendum on taking Scotland out of the United Kingdom, will the EU welcome Scotland into the EU without delay and open arms?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Reflect on that for a second. You may not want to be…
Michel Barnier
And to answer, just…
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Yeah.
Michel Barnier
…very clearly. I met several times Nicola Sturgeon, as I met leaders of the Irish Executive, the Northern Irish Executive or the First Minister of Wales. I listen everybody. We negotiate only with the Government of London, only, even if I listen everybody. But I never, never want to interfere in the domestic national policy of Great Britain, of the UK, never, and I will not do that now, for what could happen after the Brexit in UK is for the UK citizens, for the UK people to decide, huh?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Okay. Yeah, a question here at the front. I can take one more from the back, if there’s anyone that has a hand. Yeah?
James Del Favero
James Del Favero. Mr Barnier, and my question may be hypothetical, but I don’t think anybody could question…
Michel Barnier
I don’t hear it.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
The question might be hypothetical.
James Del Favero
Hypothetical, but I don’t think anybody could question your credentials in answering it. If you were asked to advise the Cabinet, the UK Cabinet, on how to approach reaching new trade agreements around the world, how would you go about that?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
How would you advise the UK Cabinet on new trade agreements? Okay, last question, who was it? I saw a hand go up there somewhere, was it – oh, sorry, was that…?
Michel Barnier
Was it a question or not?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
It was a question. It was definitely a question.
Michel Barnier
And I have not the right to answer?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
You have a right to answer. I was going to take two together, but do him first, and I can’t wait to hear what your answer is.
Michel Barnier
I’m sorry to disturb you, maladroit of the meeting, but no, no, to be frank, if I look objectively to the economic national interest of the UK, I’m speaking about the economy, I think it would have been wise to remain in the custom union. And it was an open – an open option, huh? Do you remember my famous day, huh? No?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Obviously, would the EU have given the UK a voting right then, on EU’s trade agreements?
Michel Barnier
Is…?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Would the EU have given the UK a say on the trade agreements that the EU completed, if it was a member of the customs union?
Michel Barnier
Yes, a say is different than a veto, right, yeah?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
I understand.
Michel Barnier
But a say, at that time, personally, I was ready to speak about this point.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Very interesting.
Michel Barnier
And until the very last minute, I thought it was possible to find a way with the UK to be part or a partner of this custom union. It is my answer to the current negotiation of the UK with…
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
That is the question you would answer. Sorry, there was a question to the gentleman here. I’m sorry, this has to be the last one right there. Sorry, I’ve got to come and take…
Axel De Larambourd
Monsieur Barnier, bonsoir. Axel De Larambourd, Royal College of Defence Studies. As a Franco-British citizen in this country, I’m a bit sad and concerned about the state of the entente cordiale. What do you think we need to do collectively, in both countries, to resurrect the spirit of collaboration?
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
That’s a good question to end on.
Michel Barnier
Yes, of course. The – I remember all the – my meeting with the Queen, and I wrote this story in my book, for the anniversary of the entente cordiale, and I was seated in the great honour, on the right of the Queen, during an official lunch, and I receive a free English lesson one day, asking some advice to the Queen, and I was at the time very reconnaissant to the Queen. But we have to take care, because this fate of the entente cordiale is fragilized today, yeah? So, we have to act in responsibility. I answer two times, and I can repeat a third time, that the key point for us is to rebuild the trust, the confidence, listening to the respect of the current treaty, Ireland, fishery, to avoid the wrong behaviour between allies, speaking from Australia and the submarines. And so, respect the treaty, number one, is the British responsibility now, not only for France, but for all the EU members.
Number two, between allies, be respectful and rebuild this trust, which is a key point, and not only for France, but also, for the good spirit in NATO.
Number three, trying to together to look at a strategy for the medium and long-term. And if you look at the strategy of the medium and long-term, inevitably, you find so serious challenges we have to face together. March against climate change, and the fact that within 20 or 25 years we will support 1.5 or 2 degrees supplementary [inaudible – 71:00], we change everything, everything, everything. I’ll tell you whether a former President of the region of France, from the economy, is based on snow, huh? Savoie, yeah? You are all very welcome in Savoie, yeah? But climate change, the risk of the new financial crisis. How can you imagine that the City of London, which is a key place for the financial relations in the world and the single market, under the Eurozone, are not to work to face the risk of a new financial crisis? And you have to be careful.
Number three, the terrorism. Number four, a point where I always see the – I always saw the British Government very involved with this, the co-operation in Africa, to rebuild, to make a future for Africans, for the young Africans. We have to work together. We have to work together. This is my last point. And I hope, so, once again, I don’t know what will be my role next year in France, but I will keep this future, in medium and long-term, as a priority for us, in any case. Thank you very much.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Monsieur Barnier, we’ve gone way over time, so I want to say a huge thanks for coming to us. I know you’ve got to get to another meeting at 6:30. Sorry for taking just a concentrated set of questions at the end and not blowing them up a bit more from the floor.
Michel Barnier
I will come back if you want.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
You’ll come back, in your new capacity.
Michel Barnier
Sure.
Dr Robin Niblett CMG
We’ll take that as a commitment by you. But thank you very much everyone for being with us today [applause]. We hope to see you at our next meeting. Thank you very much indeed.
