M: So, I welcome you again and thank you again very much from the research team. To start off. You have a piece of paper. You can also write something on it or keep it for yourself. I would like to ask you, yes, your first three thoughts, what are your first three thoughts that come to your mind when you hear the European Union or the EU? (long pause) If it's not three, it doesn't matter. But a few thoughts, keywords that come to your mind when you hear the European Union or the EU. (long pause) So, normally with the discussion questions I would say, volunteers first. Maybe we'll go around the room first, if I may start with DEFG2_M1.-

DEFG2_M1: -I wrote on it the equal treatment of the people in Europe, equal rights for all in Europe, equal rights and equal social treatment.

(short pause)

DEFG2_F2: I wrote down freedom to choose a job or a place to work, open borders and peace.-

DEFG2_M3: -I wrote down three keywords. Cohesion, security and freedom.-

DEFG2_M4: -I wrote down community, free travel open borders and equal treatment.-

DEFG2_M5: -As for me: democracy, freedom of travel and peace.

(short pause)

M: Yes thank you very much, thank you very much! Yes. [laughing] Would someone like to maybe explain a little bit then why you wrote these down.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: Social equal treatment. That means for me, I am organized in a trade union and that means I would like that there is equal pay for equal work throughout Europe for instance; that we do not have such big differences between east and in the new or rather new EU countries. Just for example Belgium, they have such a high wage level compared to Bulgaria or Romania, yes and that means, yes in the end for all of us here in Germany, if we continue to have such high hourly wages, there is a lack of equal treatment. That means for me, our industry, unfortunately it is the case, migrates to the low-wage countries and there is a run to the low-wage countries; and therefore if equal pay for equal work applies throughout Europe, yes, each state can build its own industry properly and not make a rural exodus, yes. That is ultimately just the cheap-wage flight to anywhere where production is cheap. Also the environment plays a role. We want to achieve environmental goals, yes. What good is it if our industry migrates to a low-wage country because the requirements are not met there, and that is social justice. So, we all have to pull together. That means the environment, climate, wages and also family, education, that all belongs in there.

(short pause)

DEFG2_F2: Perhaps directly to that point. Yes, I just think that therefore the EU is also something great, because you just get the opportunity to tackle these problems AT ALL. Because if there would not be the EU now, you would have actually no control over these things. Exactly, yes, I think that's a good point and I also find it very interesting with equal pay, because I grew up in a border region and worked abroad during my bachelor's program, because I got more money there for the same work. So I was able to benefit from that somehow. But of course not everyone can do that, everyone does not live right on the border and can say I drive ten minutes and earn about twice as much.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M3: I have written down here cohesion, actually exactly on those points, because I am of the opinion that with all the member states one could do a lot together. And I am also of the opinion that it would probably be even worse for one or the other member state in the area of wages and so on and that it is now easier for the countries to settle certain industries or to have certain things produced there, which otherwise could not have been produced there due to customs duties or whatever.

(long pause)

M: Yes, so you have already said some things about it, but then I would now perhaps ask specifically. What would you name or describe as a general position, attitude or feeling that you have towards the European Union? How would you describe your general position and feelings towards the EU?

(short pause)

DEFG2_F2: I think it was also just mentioned. Freedom, so if I had to name it that way now. Because for me that also results from the points just mentioned, at least on a personal level, yes.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: Legal equality, there we have a problem in the EU, that is, there are still member states, and that is the bad thing, that everything must be voted on and all must be decided unanimously and that is a big mistake that you do everything unanimously, because you go too much into the discussion, too long into the discussion and the time is running out to move closer together as quickly as possible. You can see it for example in Poland, Hungary, yes. If they are against something, where all other nations find it good, just because they insist on it and say, no, we don't want that, they block the progress in the EU, that's the problem. (short pause) Well, they also have the right to say their (? 09:00). I mean, everyone has the right to say no, I don't agree. But it just blocks things because everything must always be decided unanimously. It just blocks so that one changes their opinion later on. Maybe Poland or something else will change its mind sometime. But now it is important, now we want to change something, now we need your vote or we need a vote, so that we can implement something as soon as possible. Because otherwise, as you can see, it's always dragging on, always, always longer, and as far as the environment is concerned, it's taking too long, time is running out, yes, and social justice, we can see here in Germany how it's going. Everything is getting more expensive and so on. These are all problems that are being handled for too long. Unfortunately.

[00:09:58]

DEFG2_M5: First to the initial question so to speak. Basically, I have a positive attitude towards the European Union and I would go so far as to say that I simply feel like a European and that for me it's simply a matter of, yes, the horizon doesn't end at the national border, but that thanks to this freedom to travel, that one has also grown up with it, one moves relatively securely throughout Europe and somehow belongs everywhere. And that is a bit, first of all, the very individual point of view. That's a bit where it gets exciting, as with what DEFG2_M1 just said, because on the one hand it's completely right that this unanimity doesn't work in practice anymore. On the other hand, you currently still have an EU of nation states, where of course you have to grant each nation state its right to say yes, I want that, but not that way, and you cannot decide that over my head, and there is of course now with the size and number of member states of the EU, it is simply then totally difficult to come to a common denominator, where each nation state in turn for itself says yes, we also implement it back home. And I think that's the biggest challenge that the EU is currently facing, to say, can we continue to do this? Do we have to think even bigger, grow even closer together, like a kind of federal republic more or less, as it works now like the German example, because that also implies a bit, if I as a state maybe no longer have the sole power over what happens in my country. Or does it perhaps not work and the EU has perhaps already become too big again? That is not to say that I do not want anyone particular in there anymore. Don’t get me wrong. It is just that you do not that in practice you do not want to put yourself in checkmate or disable yourself, you know.

(short pause)

DEFG2_F2: Yes, I think that's also a problem, because of course I'm also with you in that I think to myself that there are issues that are close to one’s heart, environmental protection and social justice. You think to yourself, more has to happen here and, vice-versa, I also think that we must not ignore anyone. Because I had a conversation once with someone from Poland who expressed exactly these concerns, that they feel ignored, that things are decided on a higher level, which Poland must implement it with Great Britain, that it is not good at all, if it comes to a break or that is also not the sense and purpose of the thing, that one perhaps only advances goals, but loses member states for it and I believe that it is very, very difficult to find a compromise between progressiveness, so concretely to implement new laws, but at the same time also to take the individual member states along.

(short pause)

M: If I could maybe ask DEFG2_M4 if you have any particular additions regarding your feelings about Europa or in response to the other inputs?-

DEFG2_M4: -Yes, no, everything has already been said actually.-

DEFG2_M3: -Like in school.-

DEFG2_M4: -And I can only agree to that. So, I'm also positive about it. So, to my point with the equal treatment just that with the cheap wages and so, I see with my company, which is now set to close in a few years because it is moving abroad. Yes, and with the freedom to travel, you can only be positive about it.-

DEFG2_M1: -The freedom to travel is a beautiful thing. [laughs] I think it's great. But when I just, because I'm a few years older and in the generation and of those who are even older, when I hear them, ‘oh that was nice when we still had to exchange money’. For those, now in retrospect, what you saw as a relief, some are still somewhere in a land of dreams. It was nice when you still had to exchange euros or Deutschmarks and so on and show your ID card. Some say that was great. But [laughs] that's the schizophrenic thing, and now they can travel anywhere around without a passport, all over Europe, but they're still dreaming about the old things, how great that was, right.-

DEFG2_F2: -I think the Corona pandemic has opened my eyes a bit again. So, I was already alive; so I was always told when you drove abroad to get gas, because, for example, you used to have to cross the border control here. That was unimaginable for me as a child. But I find now with the pandemic, one has it noticed again, because one was just restricted, because one had to prepare for a border crossing, because one had to fill out maybe forms. And on the one hand, I understand this nostalgic perspective. I always found it exciting to exchange money or something. [laughs] And on the other hand, I also found it very strange, speaking for my generation, that you can’t just drive across the border, that you have to inform yourself beforehand, what do I need, do I have to pay attention to anything, and I found that, I don't know, that's how you got to know it again somehow.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: I have now experienced everything myself. I went to Italy last year, yes, and of course I knew that I had to fill out an entry form, then sit at the computer and look for the entry form, then fill it out. Then we have a Green Pass? Okay. So, what is a Green Pass? Now you go there, yes, where did you put the vaccine on the cell phone. You have the German COVID passport, you don't have that. Where do you get it now? Then you have everything and then you go there, you are not checked, by anyone. [laughing] You just had so much stress before the trip, yes. Which is great, of course, nevertheless. It's all much easier. I know my way around. So I was in Spain, I was on vacation in many European countries. But when I then travel to the Eastern bloc countries, there had to apply for a VISA so that I can go there. And as a border and the guard policemen, the guard soldiers with their machine guns stood there, everyone was afraid, ‘hopefully I will not be checked’. Of course, that's something we don't want to have anymore anyway. But you can see what kind of freedoms we have today. We can travel much easier, everything is much nicer, yes, I don't have to exchange money anymore. Those are all advantages of Europe. But you can't always think that there are only positive things in Europe. There are also negative sides.-

M: -This then brings me to the next question or an idea. Imagine that there is a natural disaster like an earthquake, a flood or forest fires in one of the EU member states. How do you think the EU should react?

(short pause)

DEFG2_M5: In one word, help. So for me it is totally natural that the other states should support there, with whatever means. So that is also a bit dependent on what exactly happened. That's why I don't want to be too specific about it. But I would also make the restriction that in most other cases I would have answered in the same way if it had not been an EU member state. So if you have the possibility to help, then you should do it in my opinion everywhere. However, if I simply imagine the values of the EU, then I also see an obligation to help. So again, it's just a bit stronger than maybe it would be the case somewhere else. But in general I would help.

(long pause)

DEFG2_M1: So, we had quite clear, where somewhere people are in need, one must help. But this is not only since the European Union. It has always been that one has always helped in the countries. Because I have experienced it myself. 1975 Earthquake disaster in Turkey. At that time with the military as a conscript, then it went right away, ‘who has this and that vaccination? Yes, here. We were under NATO, we were a NATO unit, yes. Then we were loaded into helicopters in Munich, suited up, then we went to Turkey and then we provided assistance there, clean-up work, digging people out. At that time, it was a matter of course for the Federal Republic of Germany to help there, and I also believe that poorer countries that don't have the money are just as willing. And I believe that this is not only European, it is the same all over the world that one has to help where hardship has broken out. This should not only be said for Europe, but at some point, we don't know in how many thousand years, we will no longer be European citizens, then we will be world citizens.

(long pause)

[00:20:32]

M: Okay, but should the EU itself react in a certain way, in emergencies or natural disasters? Do you see that something would be necessary? Who or who should then give something if necessary or make sure that there is help?-

DEFG2_M1: -Sure, you have to set up something, if you want to spread it all over Europe, then funds must first be available, you have to provide equipment, you have to have people who organize the equipment and all kinds of things. One should in the end, because there is anyway, one always assumes, we have, yes, the environment or rather the climate change, we will have to count on more disasters probably, that’s what they say, the scientists. That means in Europe it's time to somehow bundle and coordinate everything. That if somewhere, like now in Germany in the Ahr Valley, that one can offer there immediately not only German, but international help. That there everything from Europe, one must think, no longer German for Germany, but one must think simply European and set up like a Europe-wide fire department. So {we} need funds, personnel must be coordinated. So that would be important in Europe.-

DEFG2_M5: -On this point, I also find it interesting how we have actually already answered the question, because of course it was exactly this thing between the nation states and the EU thing a bit. Because my first answer was of course also a bit from the perspective of yes, of course, we as Germany have to help the other EU country. For me, of course, there is also the question of why there is not actually the central EU administrative authority or whoever. It sounds a bit like it would take a long time until they intervene. [laughs] But why is there not the central office, which coordinates this? And maybe that's already a nice first step, because just with humanity, and we also see how naturally we respond to it. I believe that this is something where all member states would have a fundamentally positive attitude towards it, whether it is Portugal or Poland. And I believe that this can only be good for the EU, if we push ahead with such projects, where we can create a consensus relatively quickly and not always only deal with the controversial points. Maybe that is a door opener for some other things.-

DEFG2_F2: -I just found it very interesting, because both of you were very concrete. Personnel, equipment and so. And I wonder if that, then I mean, who comes then along with us? So the Bundeswehr, the THW and so on. And I wonder if it would have a military touch and that might lead to problems in foreign policy and maybe not everyone in the EU would stand behind it. And I just found it intriguing, because I tried to imagine what exactly that could be, such a disaster management on EU level maybe. And then I thought to myself, my first thought was actually digitalization. Of course, you need personnel for that. But you could also simply, I think you also said it, DEFG2_M1, with coordination. So the EU could also take over a purely organizational role, for example. So, for example, see what capacities do the different member states have? Who can help and how? Who has which means, perhaps also financial means available? And that would perhaps be a first step. And then you could always look at whether you can expand it with equipment or whatever. But I don't think there's any reason why we shouldn't coordinate our efforts in the event of an emergency, yes.-

M: -If I may address DEFG2_M3, then if I noted it correctly, you had mentioned the term cohesion when you were talking about the EU, what you generally associate with it? That's a point where you see that as relevant here?-

DEFG2_M3: -Yes, and I see that, I also see that as a given. So it is in my view that if I think last summer to Greece with the forest fires, there are some firefighters from Germany who went there and there were also still very, very many more on call. So these are things that are already happening. I believe that if Germany had said last summer during the flood disaster in the Ahr Valley, Hey, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, I don't know about Luxembourg, long day, we need your help, then aid workers would probably have come and helped. I think that is always, I do not know the exact processes, but also a kind of call for help needed in the EU and I think if this happens, then the states are always ready to help. But I could also imagine a superordinate coordinating organization that provides support and creates a digital infrastructure. Of course, it would also be a kind of cohesion and progress, perhaps.

(short pause)

M: But against this background, again, case of disasters, civil protection or assistance, should some EU countries do more than others?

(long pause)

DEFG2_M4: I would say, it always depends on the capacities of the countries, how much they can help, how much they can send, whether it is financial, whether it is with goods, whether it is people who are sent there. It depends on each country individually.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: Yes good. I’ll join in here. That is from country to country, everybody should do that or help what is in his possibilities, yes. That's clear. It doesn’t depend on the money. Depends on the help [laughs] and how you are ready to help, yes. Sometimes small things can make a big difference.

DEFG2_M5: Yes, that's basically also what DEFG2_F2 has already indicated a bit, that organization and coordination are also necessary. And yes, maybe also a single part, that which all others lack, helps more than if again 2000 people come to clean up although there are already enough people bustling about so to speak. Yes to the second part. The question implies a little bit, if bigger countries or bigger economies like Germany have to give more than a smaller one like San Marino. And then I say yes, of course that is the case. So everyone should give what they can. And look at the individual case. That is also a certain responsibility, of course. Surely along the way some states would have the possibility to shirk also yes a little. But I believe, here we must trust then already on the fact that all do their part within their means and at least abide by that. Who has more can also give more.

(short pause)

DEFG2_F2: Yes for me, this is just what makes a good relationship, so that you can rely on others and you can do this then in the EU in case of disaster. But I find it also difficult, if one would now come from the higher level, you have to do this and that. Because yes, I think that is then somehow also problematic or could also be perceived by some states of course then also negatively, because one may just not be able to provide these capacities. And of course, who has more can give more. But I believe that if the member states know that they will get help in an emergency that the willingness is there to help, because of the cohesion. But it should always be voluntary.

(long pause)

[00:30:10]

M: Ok. Is there then, because again asked or vice versa, if Germany would be the country that was affected by a natural disaster. I think you have already answered that. I’ll ask again directly, what would you expect then that the other EU member states do? If there is not this EU emergency aid fund, how should other member states react?

(short pause)

DEFG2_M5: Offer help, I would say. So, in fact you don't have to wait for a call for help but you do get it and you can say here we are. What do you need? And then I see it as Germany's turn to react. That's all there is to it. [laughs]

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: So I strongly assume that we in the EU are already so far that we are informed quite well about everything with Brussels and so on. Other countries and our chancellors and ministers are so closely interconnected that if anything were to happen in our country, other countries would ask how we could help. I don't think we have to ask for help. We are already so interconnected in Europe that help is offered on our own.-

DEFG2_F2: -Yes, I actually even believe, but that was also said at the beginning I think by DEFG2_M5, I actually believe that this simply already works even beyond the EU level. Simply independent of whether it's now a Member State or not, that you simply offer help and then just look further how you can proceed afterwards.

(short pause)

M: I’ll follow up with a question. You would answer the same way if I ask how is it then with covering costs, so who should take over costs for this assistance? So, you think also in such a case if Germany is not affected but offers help that also Germany should pay for this assistance? For disaster relief in other EU member states?-

DEFG2_M1: -I know that the EU has meanwhile 750 billion euro in the fund, yes, and that one should in principle, if one really wants to and should think European, that one provides money also from this big fund also for countries which are affected by natural disasters, or where help is needed one must also use the European fund. You don't have to start with, ‘the Italians pay so much, Germany pay so much’. We are Europe. We have a sum which we pay in every year and funds must be taken from this pot of money to help. And you can't think about that nationally anymore.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M3: But I don't think that's necessarily in line with the social equality idea. Because I don't think that Germany should pay as much as Greece because Greece can't pay as much as Germany. And I think that one should then allocated by how rich a country is measured by the national economy but also the inhabitants.-

DEFG2_M1: -I did not say that someone has to pay more or less anyway, but we have it- it does not depend on the amount. Everyone pays into the European fund. And that's 750 billion. That's clear, it doesn't matter whether someone has paid just two or 20 or 30. You have to release funds from this large pot if help is needed somewhere.-

DEFG2_F2: -Yes, I feel like I'm somehow in between. I'm also sitting in between, ok. On the one hand, I also see it that way that of course you can also draw from this fund since it already exists. And on the other hand, of course, the question is, how much can you draw from it? So maybe you can only do "the most necessary" in quotation marks, because certainly certain states would have a problem with it if, for example, a large chunk of money was taken out. Simply because the prosperity is just not there so much and that is perhaps also problematic for this country if then so much money flows to another state. And I think, if now for example Germany says concretely we offer our help, - I am thinking perhaps also a little bureaucratically here - however then that is also assistance offered by Germany. And I believe, there one would have to share. One could certainly of course draw from this pot, but nevertheless I think that also individual states should then yes support more.-

M: -DEFG2_M5 first, and then you {DEFG_M1}.-

DEFG2_M5: -You first. -

DEFG2_M1: -(overlapping; not understandable) [laughing] I, so, it’s taught in upbringing, if I'm doing well and I have money available, I always have to accumulate some reserves. And so you have to break it down to Germany. If the economy flourishes, you save money for emergencies. And that’s how you have to do it in the EU to free up funds. This does not mean that one can give less money to others, that their economy is built up and so on, and the infrastructure. But from this money that comes in, you have to either increase contributions, yes, and then make a pot, for example, where you say okay, that's a reserve, should anything be needed in Europe because of natural disasters or whatever, we have so and so much saved up here and you can take out of this money. Then the other nations, which just are economically not so well-off, would not be disadvantaged because the money taken from certain states in good times, which are economically better off, has been accumulated.-

DEFG2_M5: -I'll bring in one more aspect in addition. Well, I think we all agree that if help is really needed acutely, we can't even discuss who is actually going to pay for it. You have to get there first. And if I offer help, I must at least have in the back of my mind that I could be stuck with the costs somewhere. I think that's just part of it, too, a little bit. Basically, I see that actually also like DEFG2_M1, if you have like a common, a joint account, then in an emergency it should just also be possible to access it. Only what then also comes in the next step is also most natural disasters bring then also in some form a reconstruction with it. And maybe you also have to have that in mind because I see these common funds almost more in the reconstruction story than in the short-term help, where maybe it is really first of all the one who rushes to help and then this help must also mean financial help in addition to the manpower. And yes, also here we reach then perhaps again the point to say, everyone must stop a little bit to look, what can I contribute to it? Even at the risk of making an investment and not just sending a few people.-

M: -Then we’ll take another situation or imagine another situation. Now it's about an economic crisis like the euro crisis or the financial crisis. And such a crisis occurs again and some countries are more affected than others. How should Germany react? (short pause) How should Germany react?

DEFG2_M5: So I'm aware that I actually do not provide an answer [laughs] right now but actually first only expand a bit the problem. Because I believe the more tangible a problem is in the entire society, the greater is the willingness to help. So what we have just described with the natural disaster, here we see impressively bad pictures, the more people say clearly, let's go there, help, no matter what it costs. And the less that is tangible and easy to understand for the individual citizen, the less great, I believe, is also the acceptance in the respective population of a country. And I believe, again that makes it then more difficult for the nation states to react and to act on it. I don't know where the question still extends, because exactly in such problems we as EU are actually at the limit. To be a bit more concrete. Yes, I think we should also react to this in order to solve the problem. But that can also be through economic stimulus programs or similar ideas without transferring money directly. To say it this way makes it, I think, ONE important point to keep the certain acceptance then also in the own population.

(short pause)

[00:40:49]

DEFG2_F2: Yes, I find the point of tangibility actually totally good and also yes very appropriate, and I find we have also actually already experienced it for example with Greece. I find what is always very interesting is that there is also the search for a guilty party. So, in the case of a natural disaster, regardless of the fact that it may have something to do with climate change or whatever, there are people affected, affected states that need to be helped. And what I also noticed, when it comes to financial things, that then very often people say: "Yes, but they drove themselves against the wall" and so to speak they are themselves to blame for this situation. And that thus the willingness to help is smaller. That’s just an observation. And I find nevertheless, what now is of course very opinionated, but that then in a community, yes nevertheless, we should also support each other and that can happen of course so, as you have also just said, DEFG2_M5, that one first tries to find other ways how one can help the state. But if these approaches don’t work, I also think, just for financial stability, for example, that you also offer financial support to this state.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: Yes, I think it's quite good. Normally, you don't always have to help with money right away, but you first have to take stock. What went wrong? Why did we get into this situation? What can the state do itself or how can you support it? These are important things; that one first makes an inventory and where one, where one first helps oneself before others help. If the problem still can’t be solved, then that one has turned every lever. Okay, we must save here. We must reduce the retirement age or the pension, or the, no matter what, if all the levers have been adjusted, and it still has not gotten better. You may have achieved something, but it's not what you want to achieve. And then you just have to do it financially. And then you can't say that they themselves drove against the wall. I don't believe that anyone likes to mess up their own fatherland or homeland or anything else on purpose. We don't have autocrats here who live only for themselves, instead we live in a democracy.-

DEFG2_F2: -Yes exactly, so I would also second that. And I, what just went through my head is that you can present possible solutions but perhaps also should not unconditionally insist on their implementation. For example, you, DEFG2_M1, just named a few concrete examples. And of course, the state should also show that the willingness exists to change something and to improve the situation. But that will of course also be given in the situation. But I think it is always problematic if, for example, a higher level would say that you must now implement this and that, even though this might not necessarily be appropriate in the respective country. So, perhaps they come together with an open mind and really try to work out solutions that are feasible for the states.-

M: -If I can ask DEFG2_M4 how you see it. We are in the situation, there is a new economic or euro crisis. The question then, how should Germany react in this situation? Help, don't help, help under conditions that are then tied to the aid recipient or not? How do you see that?-

DEFG2_M4: -So, definitely help. Help in any case. Yes, the thing with the conditions, as was just already said, is difficult. Does that help? Can the country afford or accomplish that at all? But yes, definitely help.-

M: -If I may also ask DEFG2_M3, how you see that also?-

DEFG2_M3: -So in principle I see things similar as with the natural disaster that one should definitely help. But I must say if now Hungary would go bankrupt tomorrow, we would now transfer 100 billion, then without conditions, I would not necessarily have a good feeling about it and would not sit cheering in front of the TV. [quite laughing]-

DEFG2_F2: -Yes actually without conditions, as you have just said, that sounds funny, but I think that one could nevertheless sketch certain points beforehand. And I think with Hungary this is an example, yes, where one should perhaps also make sure that the population is not overlooked when considering the conditions that perhaps will be set or the proposals for implementation, because, no idea. So I just think that you should also have the population on your side, because otherwise, especially in Eastern European countries, I could imagine that it might come off to the individual citizens as, ‘oh, now we have to do this and that because the EU has now said that’; and this might rather solidify rather a negative image.-

DEFG2_M1: -What DEFG2_F2 said. You have to have the people on your side. It is not only about where help is needed, but also those who help that you also have on your side. So as not to have people always saying, ‘it was from above, they against them, and THEY do with us whatever they want; but rather you have to pay attention to the people. If you want to help, you cannot just make decisions at government level, but rather you must also pay attention to the people, who have elected the, you must also attend to them and convince them, that it is a good thing. Because then come those, ‘yeah, they mismanaged everything, we have to pay’, and those are always the controversial points that set things off. And then, at some point then, people get discriminated, ‘aha, they retire already at 58, we have to go to 65’ and so on. ‘Then they should work more, earn more, pay more into the budget’. These are all such, therefore it is important with all assistance, no matter what it is one must also attend to the people. Not only the government decides, rather one must also get the support of the people.-

DEFG2_M3: -In order to, if I have it correctly in mind, I am unfortunately a little too young to remember completely correctly how things were with Greece at the time. But as I heard it, the popularity of Germany in Greece was not necessarily high after the financial crisis and the bankruptcy of Greece. And I think Germany can’t really help that in the end. I think these are then points, especially winning over the population, the heads of state of the respective country. Because I would also say that, as to my mind now, Germany was not necessarily well spoken of on the other side and then you can't win over the population. And then the popularity values and perhaps also the idea of cohesion within the EU are trampled underfoot. Even IF one helps with money at the moment.-

DEFG2_M1: -Yes well, they call us names. In in my generation we still get that. We take it seriously. That is always just, we are insulted but we do help anyway. And how we are dubbed. Yes, we have just our history, you cannot simply take that away from people’s minds, but we will always, if we also help, so much help [laughs], we will always keep our history appropriately. If we give enough, we do something, then it's called the Germans, like now for example, Trojan horse in NATO. [laughs] That means in the end, to put it clearly, whatever comes out of Poland or whatever else comes, they say Nazi and still we help. Because we try to get out of these things, to make something better out of this history, yes. And we do it, even though we get insulted.

[00:50:49]

DEFG2_F2: Yes. Gladly. Thank you. I had just directly the keyword communication in mind. It was just now also about newspapers, of course. That is of course then limited to the individual countries also mostly. But theoretically, today there is also the possibility, for example, to establish certain things at the EU level, so that you can reach all citizens. And to get such prejudices possibly also yes, out of people’s minds. I'm just wondering how you could reach all generations, because I thought of Instagram, Twitter, what do I know, something like that, where you just follow the specific page and then you get the appropriate content and there's already everything. This way one reaches however naturally only the interested ones and perhaps also rather younger people. And whether there would be perhaps also simply possibilities, no idea, to reach more people, by perhaps putting out at certain places simply booklets, so a magazine format, so a journal. If one sits in a city hall and waits for the appointment or in any other institutions and then just have available there in each country exactly those kinds of journals.-

DEFG2_M5: -Yes, again, I'll come back to the example of Greece because that was also quite good what DEFG2_F2 said at the beginning with money and conditions, so to speak. To put it in a totally simplified way, the problem was that there should be money from the EU and in Greece it was presented practically like this, but we only get it if you work three years longer. That is just the condition at the end. And already it was perceived rather in such a way, not ‘oh, thank you, they send us money, but because of the EU I must work now three years longer’. And that brings us back to the issue of communication. And on the conditions themselves, yes, that's really a double-edged thing, because on the one hand it's difficult and almost unusual to send large sums of money across the land without conditions. I believe that if there is a bit attached, yes, we have to attach conditions to it, so that this country may not get in two, three years again in the situation, that it is a bit DEFG2_M1’s stocktaking, to look at which levels and knobs must be turned, so that it also triggers a sustainable effect and is not just a temporary painkiller. But then the challenge is to make it clear to the people and that is becoming more and more difficult in populist times, which we actually have at the moment. And I think these are the biggest challenges, what you mention the communication. And here really also the factual communication, that this also asserted over the many screamers which one encounters.-

M: -Then I would like to ask the other way around, how do you think the other EU countries should react if GERMANY is affected? So Germany is the country in this new economic or euro and financial crisis, should it happen again. In that case, how should the other EU member states react then?

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: How Germany would react. Also stock-takings. Where do things stand? Where is the problem? What do we have to do to get back on track? Namely, what I expect from others, I can also expect from myself. I can't just say, ‘well, they're not doing well, I'm doing everything better, I can do everything, and then I go on living like this myself’. Then I must also accept that, if others turn at our levers, where funds are thrown around or where mismanagement occured. Then we must also accept that others also say to us, ‘here, we must save there or economize’. That’s it.-

M: -So if Germany were to receive financial support from other countries, should that also be subject to certain restrictions or regulations?-

DEFG2_M4: -If it's necessary. So as DEFG2_M1 already said. So I cannot demand something from others that I would not do even in the reverse case.-

M: -Can you explain why you see it that way?-

DEFG2_M4: -Yes because, so it is quite simple. What if I now expect something from others, then I cannot say ‘no, I do that but not in return’. So, as you do to me, so I do to you. Yes.-

M: -How do the others see it? Is that approval or, [laughing] or disagreement?

DEFG2_M5: I see it exactly the same way and simply under the premise that you also have a factual discussion about why these conditions then also bring me further. Because it's not supposed to bully me, these conditions, but should actually serve so that it runs better in the future and that. As long as you discuss on factual basis then in best case what results is also that both sides see it that way.

(short pause)

M: DEFG2_M3, do you feel the same way or, spontaneously do you see it similarly? You don't have to answer but-

DEFG2_M3: -No, that's exactly how I see it. So I can't add anything to that.-

M: -Ok. Yeah then maybe I'll ask in a different direction [laughing]. I'm asking in a different direction. We leave then the the economic crisis, so when there are crises, inequalities are exacerbated, but also there are inequalities between countries but also between people within a country there are inequalities. What do you think, should the EU have a common program, a common fund or similar to reduce social inequalities? Given, for example, increasing income inequalities in societies. (short pause) Why or why not? (long pause) Now let's ask in general terms?

(short pause)

DEFG2_M5: I'll start again now. [laughing]-

DEFG2_M1: -Yes, you go ahead, your turn.-

DEFG2_M5: -Yes, especially I find, to equalize inequality first between the individual states. So the question leaves open whether this happens within a state or between the states. I believe that the inequalities between the states are still much greater than within the individual states. I also think that something is already happening, as we have already stated in the very first round, that the EU is basically promoting this initially. But that is just, that was also DEFG2_M1’s initial statement, there is still a very, very long way to come to the same wage levels, etc. And I see that quite the same as in the opening statement, that one should work on it although this cannot happen at all with the snap of a finger. That is also quite clear to me. Optimal is of course, if one creates it to set up comparable programs, which can manage both a little bit, because of course especially someone worse off in a nation state then otherwise could again easily tend to say ‘yes, why do you give now all the cash toward Bulgaria?’ To present that very simplified. ‘But I'm not doing well either’. And accordingly, it would certainly be useful if you can manage to bring both individual states closer and at the same time to adjust things a bit within the countries.-

DEFG2_M1: -We still have the problem that we have different states in the EU, set different priorities as far as tax is concerned, yes, and that's why we can't stay the same from one day to the next. Because we have the 19 percent VAT {in Germany} and then we go to Austria. Where we are, the gasoline prices has so and so many euros more. If I go to Austria, without crossing the border, without border control, without changing money, I can fill up cheaper. Yes and so on because each state would then have to do something, yes, so that we are on the same level, yes. One would have to increase, the other would have to decrease, so that you are the same and then the equal treatment in the EU would be equal. But that is not the case, yes. We also have the infrastructure. Industry also plays a role, yes. Where do we have the biggest industry? We already have the differences here in Germany. Where is the biggest industry located, okay? That's the way it is in the EU, too.-

[01:00:20]

DEFG2_F2: -Yes and apart from these whole individual systems per state, there are then also individual problems. So clearly, a fund in the form of financial resources, there you had already addressed problems, DEFG2_M5. But I also believe that there must be VERY individual solutions and you can't have this one program and then simply apply it to different states. I believe that you would have to work VERY closely with the nation states in order to be able to set up something individually. And I think the problem is simply that this idea of equality is also always evaluated differently by different states. So we notice that also in Germany that it is a problem, yes, between with inequality, unequal wages, housing and whatever other problems arise. And yes, I imagine that it would be very difficult to simply tackle everything at EU level.-

DEFG2_M5: -I believe the main problem with the possibly most same standard is, yes that everyone who has allegedly low standards immediately wants to say yes, because they, because they see an opportunity for improvement. But someone who already has a good standard doesn't want to give anything away. Unfortunately, this is a bit in the nature of things. So in the end, the task is almost to bring everyone to a high standard. And I think you can hardly make it any clearer how difficult that is. It's not just done with some fund that's, of course we're talking about a very theoretical idea, but if it was that simple, it would be nice. But I think that's really.-

DEFG2_M1: -I think the basic idea is clear. We all want the same thing. [laughing] No matter what nationality, yes. But how do we get that? It's not an easy thing, and I don't think we're going to get it done by the end of the century, that's how it's going to be. Because whoever has something doesn’t like to give. [laughs] That's the thing.-

M: -But for example one idea could be that the EU could set up a Europe-wide system to fight unemployment in all countries, funded by all EU member states. Should that happen? Do you think that should be the case, (short pause) that all member states, for example as we know it in Germany, would also pay an EU-wide system if unemployment could be fought?

(long pause)

DEFG2_F2: That is now very personal, but because of the pandemic I got to sample the experience of unemployment now also in Germany for a short time; and found the system already problematic, partly. And I ask myself therefore whether it would be possible at all, here also again because of the individual circumstances in the EU. It can also simply have climatic reasons that perhaps in certain states it is simply too hot at certain times of the year, too cold, whatever, and then unemployment rises. Or now in the pandemic, that different states are affected differently and therefore other situations also arise and there again I think that it would be problematic to have ONE program that does justice to this.

(short pause)

M: If I could perhaps still, DEFG2_M1, I see you, follow up, that it will be problematic to do justice to these differences? That is where, for example, you would see a problem, DEFG2_F2?-

DEFG2_F2: -Yes, exactly. Simply because it already happened to me in Germany, even if it was only for a short time, that certain things are assigned to you. Irrespective of whether you receive money or not, which you have to fulfill and which were almost impossible to fulfill during the pandemic, for example. And that is of course also a very subjective experience that I have now had with it, in a very special situation, of course, one must also say. But that's exactly why I would question whether it's always so easy. For example, if I expect a construction worker to apply {for a job} once a week in winter. Then that could cause problems for the person. And if I imagine that now on EU level, with certain- so it would be a solution, you apply once a week as minimum goal and then you hopefully have a job soon. And I think within Europe you are confronted with other problems simply which just go beyond the German point of view, I would just say, and which one perhaps as a result also does not consider yes.-

DEFG2_M1: -As for unemployment or rather the support then financially for the unemployed, yes, that's not so simple. Because we also have that here in Germany. We have so much social security. That is, the industry can normally register short-time work, yes, where we pay, then supplements are paid then from the unemployment insurance scheme. We have noticed it now in the pandemic. The short-time work was made dependent on 10 percent of the workforce, I could already register short-time work. Normally, the benchmark is much higher. And that's not the only thing that would have to be done, it comes with a whole bloated bureaucracy. It's not that easy to implement throughout Europe. How are you supposed to do that? Yes. Because Germany I always say, we are always a bit of a showpiece. I mean now, the reactions, that one then gets unemployment benefits, 60 percent, then tomorrow one is 65 percent if it lasts longer and so on. So many things happened in the pandemic. And if I imagine that now, one wants everything like in Germany. You don't have to do it the way Germany did. There are also other countries, they certainly also have, I mean. But when I imagine that if you wanted to impose our system on someone in Bulgaria or whatever. And that means in the end, the European Community, the European Parliament, THEY would have to bring all this together, vote and make the best of this thing. How can we help? Because, I can only speak for Germany, because I can also talk a bit about Italy, yes, because I'm constantly in Italy. And then ask, what happens if you get unemployed today? How do you get, how long do you get support? It's not as easy as it is here, you know. And then that is also connected to several things. Basic foodstuffs are much cheaper there than here, rents are cheaper than here. And so on and so forth.

(short pause)

M: I would then maybe ask a follow-up question. All can answer but I'll start with DEFG2_M3. Now a bit more concrete, so should Germany contribute to the reduction of unemployment in another EU country even if that would involve additional costs? Or the alternative an EU-wide system? Or neither?-

DEFG2_M3: -I honestly don't have an opinion on that because I think that there are so many different social systems in the countries and I don't think it's necessarily feasible. And I don’t have, I can’t form really a conclusive opinion on this.-

M: -DEFG2_F2, Connected to this and to the previous, if you like.-

[01:09:57]

DEFG2_F2: -Yes, I would have actually said almost the same thing as DEFG2_M3, that I find it very difficult to form a final opinion. So idealistically speaking, of course it would be great if you can help. I just ask myself whether that is then so feasible and I had just again the thought on what was said before. There are also different levels or standards, which simply concerns the social security systems. And sure, for me as a German, if I see, how my social security and insurance in Luxembourg is for example, then I find that totally desirable. But now the question would be, would Luxembourg like to then lower things a bit, so that it would be like possible for all states. And I think then, there would be again such a problem, yes.

(short pause)

M: But now asked back to the specific reduction of unemployment. Maybe also then DEFG2_M4 asking how you see that. So you think that would be useful, not so useful?-

DEFG2_M4: -It would be nice if it were possible. But I don't think it, that it's possible. Just for the reasons that were mentioned, with all the different countries. In each country it is different. I can't imagine that this is possible.-

M: -Footnote: I also emphasize there are no correct answers to my questions. [laughing] So don't worry. Okay, DEFG2_M1 and then DEFG2_F2-

DEFG2_M1: -Particularly reduction of unemployment. If you look at it from a European perspective, it's the same as always. Europe is huge. One would have to, [base on] states in Europe, which, where are job openings. There would have to be again an imposed system. How can I coordinate? How, if somewhere someone enters into unemployment, for certain reasons. What education does he have? What kind of skills does he have? Where can I place him in Europe? But then mostly the problem is, we still have different languages. And that's also the problem, yes. Then it means that in the school system, in principle, we have to agree on which national language, which common language? English, we agree, everyone learns English from child up to school, so that later in Europe someone from Latvia is sent down to Italy to work as a specialist there, yes. But then we have the problem, everyone builds up a living. We can't take the house on our backs and take it with us. And these are the things where it would probably fail. Or then a long-distance relationship in the marriage. If you look at the statistics, how many long-distance relationships falls apart. Yes then these are the consequences of it, yes.-

DEFG2_F2: -But what also just came to my mind and what the EU can do well in terms of unemployment is job placement. That already exists on a national level, of course. So you can also say, I'm looking internationally for a job and get accordingly also a national agency, international offers. That is possible and there is also for sure also on European level or mostly one can look meanwhile also internationally. But that would be interesting of course, if one looks particularly, or that you perhaps get offered something also for having certain skills. I can now also add to what you just said, DEFG2_M1, that for me, for example, it was always clear to learn French as a priority. Precisely because it was perfectly clear to possibly go in that direction. So France, Luxembourg, to get a job later. Which options like Belgium are also connected to that and whatever, I didn't have that in my mind at that time. But I do believe that if you are interested in it, you have the opportunity to learn the relevant languages. And at the latest at universities, for example, through language courses and so on and so forth.-

DEFG2_M5: -First of all, I agree with DEFG2_M1. The freedom to travel must not become an obligation to travel at some point. So if thinking the German system a little bit further, I can't tell the Maltese person that next week you'll start your job in Lapland or there'll be no more money. So that's quite clear. And I also believe that there can be a bit of a catch. There is also partly already what, that for example care workers for Germany also are specifically recruited in other states. If that combats the unemployment there, that is something nice and good. But it can also involve a bit of risk, keyword higher wages that the other country then bleeds out and by doing exactly this we actually even counteract this lifting up to same standards. And also here one should watch out. Otherwise here the basic question, if we can do something against unemployment there, we should do that. I am also again on the idealistic trip and say yes sure, we can do that. But I think we tend in the whole group to say again and again, if we can do something good here, yes, we want to. Then there comes a little Christian Lindner and says, ‘that all costs money however’ and is perhaps also not completely wrong. That has to come from somewhere. [laughing]-

M: -I'll get to DEFG2_M3 in a minute. DEFG2_M5, if you don't mind me asking a follow-up. Why would you want to do that? In your opinion? Even if it's ideal.-

DEFG2_M5: -Because I fundamentally believe in this European idea, keyword cohesion or solidarity and stand behind it and would like to see it, if we could all reach the same standard together.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M3: I think that this whole discussion has to be conducted on a partly idealistic basis, because it's not like the discussions we had before about natural disasters. It's not as easy to do something about unemployment as it is to send firefighters to Greece. These are really two completely different things, and against unemployment there comes perhaps sometimes an intervention, with a greater intervention in the states. But also many many more problems are attached than like if I would say now ‘here we have 10,000 firefighters with cars, water or we send them down or up there’. Wherever, maybe there's a fire sometime in Sweden. [laughing]

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: There are always livelihoods involved in unemployment, there are people. It's not just people who work, there are also families linked with them. And you also have to take that into account, yes. That means well, the dad or mom gets a job somewhere, yes, then work there, nice. They speak the language, okay, and the children were in kindergarten, had a spot in the kindergarten, okay, they have a place at school and so on, they get torn out of their whole environment. It simply does not work that way. One must always {see} the social and the family and the people in the foreground. And so just simply transfer, one needs to take other things in consideration. How can I help here further? Either by retraining, further education or something else. That would be then the considerations, not having to travel up and down, but that costs money. Money, further education costs money, yes, and time. I don't get that if someone becomes unemployed today because there are no electricians or no electricians are needed at all, and I retrain him as a bricklayer [laughs]. He also needs his training time until he masters the trade. It is not that simple. Those are only the traditional professions, okay. There are still completely different occupations, where still much more detailed, where still much more specialized knowledge is needed, more school knowledge is needed.-

M: -Well then on to, wonderful transition. We are approaching the end now. Because I have to ask you now. We have discussed quite a lot about the European Union in the context of social inequalities, economy and mutual support. Are there any other areas that you think are relevant when talking about these relations and mutual support WITHIN the EU?

(short pause)

[01:20:04]

DEFG2_M3: I have also written down here the point security.-

M: -Thank you, DEFG2_M3. [quite laughing]-

DEFG2_M3: -Ah eh perfectly said. Very well accommodated. I believe that definitely included in that is also that IF certain countries are attacked or have problems, that there also then unfortunately, so not unfortunately that they should be helped, but rather unfortunately that then maybe what is necessary is military help. And that one sees the interests of the EU then also as one’s allies and so then also act against other countries which are perhaps not so well regarded in these countries - allies and then not, what do I know, go to China and say yeah, but the Italians are really stupid, we do not like them at all and if you want, then go ahead. No, but that you also support them and that the EU has a very big security idea and that perhaps in that context. I think that is a very, very interesting topic, but also a topic that you can see very, very critically, a European army could perhaps also become a topic. But how to design it and make sure that nothing stupid comes out of it, but only security can be guaranteed, is I think the problem or the biggest issue.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: A European army, okay, I think that's good. But it needs a clear mission and that means for me to close the national borders, the European external borders. Just as the Bundeswehr was founded back then, it was said that the Bundeswehr is only for the defense of national borders. In the meantime, Afghanistan, Mali, everywhere where we are fighting. Yes, but in the end, a European army is not an offensive army, but rather a defensive army.

DEFG2_M5: I'm completely with you. The refugee crisis is now complicated again, because actually there you could also interpret, for example, the defense of national borders purely. Especially when I look at what's going on at the Polish-Belarusian border, it seems that the Polish military interprets it the same way [laughs]. And it's then I think again intriguing because even there we know that the opinion within the EU is quite, very heterogeneous.-

M: -If I may ask DEFG2_M5, briefly. Do I understand correctly that in the area of the refugee and migration approach would also be an important issue, would be in this context of mutual support?-

DEFG2_M5: -Yes, I think it is even the most explosive issue for years within the EU. And actually, I find the first real topic, which is so really divisive between the states. Of course, we had already the economic crisis etc. where there is also at times a bit of tension. But on the subject of refugees you get the impression that the fronts are really hardened and no common consensus has been reached for years. And that is very difficult for the EU, I think.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: That is a problem, refugees. But we will not solve it overnight, but I rather believe that our great powers are the problem anyway, that they interfere everywhere and let countries bleed, that they mine earth deposits and resources somewhere. They say no matter, they send weapons there, they should fight each other, and we then come as peace makers afterward and get all the stuff out of the ground for next to nothing, yes, that they then make a killing from the world market. That's how things look. That is our problem. The refugees are people who have to be helped. You said, there are problems and society IS divided. But when people are in need, we must help. It does not matter what nationality. And not only think European then, you have to think in the big picture.-

DEFG2_M5: -So first of all, I am completely with you in terms of substance and that is perhaps also the problem, which we are now discussing all the time, again something that has been overlooked a bit. Because we have talked a lot about how does it now work within the EU to achieve the same standard? But this can also have effects beyond the EU, which in turn can have effects on the EU. So, for example, if we use subsidies for chicken meat to ensure that agriculture within the EU reaches some standard, but as a result then somewhere in Africa on the market it is cheaper to import chicken meat from the EU than to produce locally and to advance themselves. Then it is no wonder that someone then perhaps takes off and says, ‘then I must go there, because the money is easier to earn there’. And we always come back to the point that you actually almost always have to think globally.

(short pause)

DEFG2_M1: Well, we had the problem all the time that the refugees came over the Mediterranean, via Italy or somewhere else. Or via Greece. There we already had the disagreements in Europe, how do we distribute them. Some said, ‘they send them all to us’, or said, ‘hey, the Austrians, they do transit, everyone to Germany’. The Italians complained that they were not getting any help. And when they tried to propose a factor for calculating, how much do we send to each country, then the others also resisted, okay. And that's the huge problem. It's a shame that people have to flee in the first place, yeah. THAT is the bad thing. And we still supply weapons [laughs] in some countries, yes, and we still support that, okay. And the people have to be helped on the spot. Not just like that, when I always hear that Europe or Germany is the wonderland. It is not true at all. It's bad enough that people have to flee, but we have so much money that is being accumulated somewhere, yes, that it should also be brought to these countries and development aid should be provided. Real development aid. Not that there is some chieftain and collects all the money, but the money must go where it is needed. That is our problem.

DEFG2_F2: I already had thought about this earlier, but now with this point on local help, which will become ever more difficult. Because we will come to the point, we will have climate refugees, to whom we cannot say ‘yes, then go back where you come from’, because that speck of the earth is unfortunately not there anymore. And therefore I also think that it is not only important now, that we have seen in the past, but will also become increasingly important that Europe or the EU finds a solution for the refugee issue. Because we have just at some point in the EU itself Member States that are affected by the climate crisis, because here, of course, it will have effects. And at the same time, a refugee movement is being unleashed, that makes 2015 look ridiculous. And these will be people to whom we cannot say that they will return to their country of origin. And I think that's when we need a European solution at the latest. Yes, we have to find a way so that this distribution mechanism works somehow, because some countries will say ‘no, but we won't do that now’ and how to deal with this.

(short pause)

M: I'm coming to the very last question but DEFG2_M1-

DEFG2_M1: -What you said. I think we can no longer rely on China, Russia, America, but we must finally start to think, how can we make a difference in the world? And not from Germany or something else, but rather how can we as Europeans intervene in world history? And we must not continue to leave it to China, Russia or America, but we must finally assert our place. And I also believe that we have a duty to do something that will change something in the whole world. And that's why Europe must position itself much more strongly.

(short pause)

M: Then my last question and there I would ask then like at the beginning now finally to all to contribute a last input. Let's go around in a row. And the question is simply, what would be the final comment from everyone on this topic or set of topics that we have discussed today? Can also be something simply that you still think of that came to mind but couldn't yet address? Do you have a final comment or anything else to add? Can also, maybe I still wait briefly.

(long pause)

[01:30:39]

DEFG2_M1: So the whole discussion what we had here now. I think we have to get out of the habit of thinking nationally. We have to think bigger and we have to think European and not always just complain and whatever, but we also have to finally face the problems. And not just on a national level, but on a European level. That is my thought.-

DEFG2_F2: -Yes exactly, so I would also say that we should start to discuss major issues at EU level. But we should not forget to attend to the citizens of the individual member states, so that we can achieve this goal and not lose half of them beforehand through scaring them off. Because I see it this way that the importance of the EU will also continue to rise and must also continue to rise on the basis of the problems that are also becoming more and more acute. Like for example the climate change, where it requires just global solutions. But where it is also much more useful if, I say, something happens at the EU level, than if it is simply a single nation state that changes something.-

DEFG2_M3: -I find and think add to the first two before me, that more borders must be overcome, must be thought beyond borders, that not only in the EU, but also globally. We have meanwhile a global world the and/or problems, which are meanwhile there, are more or less nearly all global. Whether that concerns taxes for large companies such as Amazon, Facebook, where global solutions must be found, to climate change. There simply must be thinking beyond borders. And Belgium can’t find a solution for itself and Germany a solution for itself, it must happen globally and largely and here the EU is an institution that can and should do a lot.-

DEFG2_M4: -Yes, it simply can only be done together. And they should, you should work towards it and yes, that's actually everything.-

DEFG2_M5: -I see it also completely like all the others, that European approaches are definitely needed, even in world politics. For me, one of the biggest challenges here is Europe to speak with one voice. And I personally find that it is also currently a bit urgent. So as much as I'm a fan of it, to include as many individuals with me and as many states with me. If I really notice then somewhere, we could as Europe at a point we can speak together but we have one, two states, they oppose everything, then I must also really in the sense of the greater whole ask myself the question of whether it must then also proceed without the one two, so as not to lose hold of, lose sight of the big goal. Even if that of course would not be the favored solution.

((M: Yes then I thank you very much again for your time, for this stimulating and intensive discussion. And I think we could have led it even longer. But we have exhausted your time enough and so this part of the evening is finished.))