M: Well, okay. Are there any more questions for me from your side? About the research, about the discussion itself or anything like that?

(short pause)

M: Okay. So I've asked you to have a piece of paper near you for the beginning of the discussion, if you have one, with something to write with. If you don't have it, that's not a big problem either. And... so (short pause) the first question would be, what are the three thoughts that first come to your mind when you hear the words 'European Union' or that expression 'EU'? Just write those thoughts down and then we will discuss.

((~60s for thinking and writing down the ideas))

M: Okay. Well, I see most of you have already made a note of something, if you didn't get three, that's okay too. I don't know, who would like to start with their three ideas? I don't know, LTFG1_M3, maybe you?

LTFG1_M3: Okay. Well, I've written down what came into my head like immediately. So first of all, I always keep thinking that it's a huge group of countries. Actually, well, practically a bit like the Soviet Union, it was a huge group of countries too. The European Union is also a huge group of countries. Except, of course, everything is different {than in the Soviet Union}. Then there is the thought that, well, it is a bit of a meat jelly. So maybe a little bit... well, not in a malignant sense, but a little bit softy, maybe a softy formation really. But maybe it can't be any other way, when people have their own opinions, if they can express them, and there are a lot of opinions, and it's hard to reconcile {those opinions}. But say, that's the thought. Thirdly, well also, I often think that it's actually a good thing that I live not in... {that I live in} European Union, but not Belarus, for example. Well. When I had to travel a bit more before covid, it's really nice actually, that you just sit and go, you don't need any kind of a visa, it's just a really good feeling of freedom of movement.

M: Thank you. LTFG1_F4?

LTFG1_F4: Well, about freedom of movement LTFG1_M3 just finished, my first thought was freedom of movement. Well, if like for an ordinary person, it's things like travel, everything is very simple, I get in the car and I go. If you look at [smiles] business or something like that, I also think that Lithuania, such a small country, without this, without this freedom, well, I can't imagine, it would be very complicated indeed. Then the next part... the other thought that I actually come across in my own work is the funding of infrastructure projects. From the European Union [smiles]. In other words, money. All those billboards where we go and see that it is European Union funding. A road here, a path there, here a bridge, there something else. So I think that on our own, without these... without this funding, we wouldn't have done a lot of things. That is my opinion. And actually, personally, when I've come across these projects myself, well, it's still, it's a huge support for us. And then I couldn't think of a third one, but then, in the current context of what is happening, I still think it is security. As a citizen of Lithuania myself, as a citizen of the European Union, I actually feel safer living in the European Union than, as LTFG1_M3 said, in Belarus or somewhere else. That's it. These are my thoughts.

M: Thank you. LTFG1_M1?

LTFG1_M1: So [smiles] already practically {they} named {everything}, so my first one was the same as LTFG1_F4's, that... and I have directly touched that, there's money, finances, investments. With which came the maintenance, the improvement of these big infrastructural objects, which, in fact, for the state itself, without the European Union would be much more complicated. Well, and of those named, probably to save everybody's time, it was also the freedom to travel, and there is also that sense of security. Being in the European Union and not alone. In... say, if we would be alone and not part of the European Union. So it's practically not a miracle here that we all think alike and also and those three main points come together. Probably that's it.

M: Thank you. LTFG1_M2?

LTFG1_M2: My first thought is very similar. Now I forgot the name of the first speaker.

LTFG1_M3: LTFG1_M3.

M: LTFG1_M3.

LTFG1_M2: LTFG1_M3. Kind of LTFG1_M3, yeah. That it is quite a group of countries. The second thought immediately, well, as you said - with what {associates}, it's directives. And the third - regulations. It's as simple as that, so to speak. That's it. Those are the thoughts.

M: Thank you. One thing, maybe, I want to come back to LTFG1_M3. That expression of yours was "meat jelly", right. And you-

LTFG1_M3: -Yes.

M: -you sort of elaborated a little bit, but maybe you could expand on that thought. What do you mean by "meat jelly" in that... metaphor [laughs].

LTFG1_M3: Maybe [sighs] let's put it this way. Well, of course, there is freedom of speech, there is freedom of expression, there are many opinions. But the meat jelly is that some decisions travel very long, they take a very long time, they are debated for a very long time. For example, one of such, say, examples is the rotation of time. Well, as an example, with those I talk to, I have not met anyone, personally, who has said: "I absolutely need this." And as far as I've read it and in other countrieslike let's say, there's an agr... {agreement} well, like, opinion that it shouldn't be rotated. But those debates have been going on and on, for many years, and there is no actual solution. So. Maybe, say, there is a country that is just stubbornly holding on, but say, {it would be good then} that it is clearly stated that 'We are rotating it because of this and that'. Or 'We do not rotate because'. So. Well, let's say that maybe this softer politics, eh... I'm not saying that we need to do something like the example of Belarus, but let's say from... to highlight certain ideas and stick to them, to {make} decisions, and those decisions have to be made for all countries, like, say, em... Well, if it is already made, then to stick to it. Because when, for example, they start to discuss, say, some interests of Germany, interests of the big countries, then practically there emerges that division again, and out of a huge, huge group of countries, which could be very strong, there actually remains meat jelly again. Because, well, big capitals, big money are pulling in one direction, pulling in the other direction. There, for example, like the same gas pipe, the same Nors Tra... that Nord Stream 2. There again, well, {pulling} one way, {pulling} the other way, and well... so when you do not know much it’s just that some things seem strange. Maybe because of not knowing the exact situation.

M: How do others feel about what LTFG1_M3 said?

(long pause)

M: Maybe I got a glitch here for a bit. How do others feel about what LTFG1_M3 was saying?

[00:10:00]

LTFG1_F4: Well, I'd like to say what my impression is from what I heard. In fact, these are the qualities that distinguish the European Union from the Soviet Union. In the Soviet Union, there were also many, right, of those states, but there was one centralised government that determined everything, decided everything, without any regard to any wishes, opinions, there were no any discussions [smiles]. So this is where we have this democracy, which has its pluses, but it also has its minuses. And we often think of democracy as being only good. But democracy is just as much bad. So this meat jelly comes out of that democracy, I would think. And, of course, interests, money, those also make influence, because every country is, well, even if we are in the European Union, but what are we all looking at? We are looking so that it is good for us. We do not think, 'Well, it will be good for Germany if we do this'. We want the Germans to do so that it is good for us [laughs]. That's the human feature here. And that is why the European Union is human. I would think so. Well, I, for one, like that quality. Well, sometimes, of course, that is the minus, when it is needed to take sudden decisions, some kind, like here with Belarus, about that border or some other support, and when you don't receive it, well, you get angry. It seems to you - what is there to discuss, what is there to debate? It has to be done. But this is where we are dealing with the real democracy. I would think so. That is my opinion.

M: Thank you. Maybe there is someone who wants to add or say something different? LTFG1_M1, LTFG1_M2, what do you think?

LTFG1_M1: Well, in principle everything {what was said} is right. I probably more with LTFG1_F4, agree more. Yes. And I agree with LTFG1_M3 in the sense that sometimes I would like to see much, much faster decisions. And not to get involved into those discussions. Of course, maybe some kind, some kind of agreement, of course, I would wish for faster decisions, and those agreements. But I agree with LTFG1_F4. Yes, we have that democracy... we have to accept that sometimes it takes much longer to make some kinds of decisions than we would like.

LTFG1_M2: I agree with that as well and I think it has to be as it is, that those decisions take longer, in principle they have to take longer.

(short pause)

M: Thank you. Still-

LTFG1_M2: -And exactly making mistakes, making wrong decision, that time, delaying the decision is not a bad thing.

LTFG1_F4: Well, again, depends how you look at it, at times the delay in making a decision is already a bad decision. And maybe here the problem is that there is no leader in the European Union, one who {would guide} all like that. But on the other hand, again-

LTFG1_M2: -if common, sorry to interrupt, if you take the whole set of decisions, well, say, out of 100 decisions to make, and delayed {decisions}, and urgent {decisions}, then certainly 100 of delayed decisions will be more effective than all made urgently. Well, that is my side of how I see it.

LTFG1_F4: Well, I mean, you would have to analyse each decision separately [laughs].

M: Yeah, yeah.

LTFG1_F4: To put it that way, I... I wouldn't dare to say so [laughs].

M: Okay. You mentioned, a few of you mentioned security, right. Again - what does that security refers to? What is it about? Well? I think, who here, and LTFG1_F4 and I think, and LTFG1_M1 mentioned security. What did you mean?

LTFG1_F4: Well, in an elementary way, say the current situation with those, the emigrant crisis, right, the conflict with Belarus, with the same Russia. E... so where would we be if we were alone, say, like Ukraine now. It does not belong to the European Union. And actually, maybe it would like to. Maybe just being there would help it, I don't know. But, well, I mean, anyway, I think, both NATO and the European Union, we kind of are a part of something, and if something, well, I want to believe that if we are under some threat, they will help us, those our older brothers, sisters [smiles] {meaning the other countries of the EU, the bigger ones, stronger ones}. That's it. Somehow it's like, well, you have somebody you can ask. After all, we are participating somewhere. Because on our own we are too small. And somehow...

M: Thank you. LTFG1_M1, what did you associate that security with?

LTFG1_M1: Yeah, I agree with LTFG1_F4 in principle, and that security, I fully agree with LTFG1_F4, and so that our common security, there is a new European agency that has recently come into being, called the Defence Agency [participant says “Defence Agency” in English]. Which is practically dealing with all those issues and with those external threats. It is, well, another, another measure that would allow us feeling more secure. It means that for the European Union itself, not just for us alone, or for those on the border, that it practically shows that everybody is concerned, is concerned about that issue. The issue of security.

M: LTFG1_M3 and LTFG1_M2, is there anything you want to add?

LTFG1_M2: Yeah. I mean, I would also like to, well, security, like they say, well, Ukraine would be in the European Union. Again, what security are we talking about? Is it the threat of being attacked by another country, right, or is it the security of just - you go out on the street and you feel safe? So if the latter, that you go out and you feel safe in the street, then I do not think that because of being accepted into the European Union it became safe. Your standard of living is not going to rise accordingly and those mentalities are not going to change, I do not think that anything changes. But yes, the international one, maybe you can supposedly feel safer.

M: Thank you. LTFG1_M3?

LTFG1_M3: I'm practically, yeah, just to join in, and let's say, like that air patrol mission, for Lithuania it would, it would be a very heavy burden. To acquire its own aircrafts that are up-to-date. But when we are in the European Union, we practically do not have our own aircrafts, but the airspace is patrolled. It is... unequivocally. In a large group the security is always better.

M: Another question. Does being a citizen of the European Union have any special meaning for you?

(short pause)

LTFG1_F4: Well, as much as being a citizen of Lithuania. I don't know. Namely the European Union? Yes. It has a meaning [laughs].

M: What is it? Well, what does it mean to you? What goes with that for you, well?

LTFG1_F4: A positive meaning. Because well... (short pause) you're like a member of something. Let us take, well, going somewhere, to some country within the European Union, right, you're like a part of them. You're not like, well, the same like in airports, em... easier travelling. And you feel it too. Standing in that queue where "Coming from the European Union" [laughs]. If to say it simply [laughs].

LTFG1_M3: Yeah, yeah.

M: Got it, right. LTFG1_M3?

LTFG1_M3: I remember when I was a student I went to England to pick strawberries5 and I saw two different queues, where there was a queue from West Europe and then there was a queue from East Europe [participant says “West Europe” and “East Europe” in English]. So it's a very interesting feeling to stand there where one queue is moving fast and the other queue is moving very slowly, check-ups going on. So when you have that freedom of movement, which is actually a normal, I think, a very normal thing, it's just that you don't really appreciate it and it's just like air. You just breathe it in and, well, you don't feel how much you're breathing in, like what. But you would feel it if it suddenly disappeared {freedom of movement}, the walls would reappear. So for me, first of all, the European Union is the movement, and you just sat down, went somewhere, you don't have to think that somehow here now, you have to come up with a way to get past it {meaning border crossing procedures}. That is what is really important.

M: LTFG1_M1?

LTFG1_M1: Yeah, I totally agree with the colleagues. And the other thing what that, let's say, the European passport gives us, is that even in countries where there is not even a Lithuanian embassy, and if you are in trouble, you go straight to an embassy of a European Union {country}, and they treat you as a European, and they will provide you all the help. So there is one more, one more plus, let's say, from the situation, if you are in a country where there is no Lithuanian embassy.

[00:20:14]

M: LTFG1_M2, what does it mean to you to be a citizen of the European Union? Does it mean something?

LTFG1_M2: Does it mean something to me? No, well, I'm not like, I don't travel that much, yeah, so I don't really experience that kind of reasons, but like I said, my second thing is directives and regulations. It {means} certain commitments, yeah. So, or that various directives... Well, like, there are these directives, there are these regulations, yeah, so in a way, well, at times, well like elementary with the pollution, yeah, with the wastewater, yeah, well, you can do something {wrong}, but you know, that there is that directive, and that, how do you say it, the educational {aspect}, yeah, well, you take on these obligations, you know, how to say, that you cannot pollute, you can't do it, because well, that's what we agreed. It is more in that direction from my side. Well, and so from those directives and everything else there comes that common policy [dog barking]. How we {will be doing}, where we {will be doing}, what we are moving. That's it.

M: Thank you. E... We'll move on to the next question now. How would each of you describe your general attitude, outlook or feelings towards the European Union?

(short pause)

LTFG1_M1: M, can you say it again? I may not have heard everything.

M: How would you describe your general attitude, outlook or feelings towards the European Union? The most general or in general, what would be the main position?

LTFG1_F4: Well, mine is positive [laughs]. Positive feelings, positive attitude.

M: What does that include? Why? Or what is the most-

LTFG1_F4: -I don't know, even those, the three thoughts that I named, right, I also looked, well, all of us who named them, all those... they actually were positive. As far as I understand, we do not have Euro-pessimists here [laughs]. That's it. And so it seems to me, are there any Euro-pessimists in Lithuania at all? Because for us life has really improved since we joined the European Union.

M: Thank you. How do others see it?

LTFG1_M3: I maybe, well, this idea pops up that, well, stability, like... big structure, it's quite slow, but it's stable. And, for example, kind of like circumstances, say, well... all kinds of happenings, events, but it {the structure} deals with them bit by bit and you can even predict a little bit, let's say, how everything is going to move. Well, there is no, no such thing as, say, like Belarus, that there is complete instability, that you don't know - here today neither... for Ukraine, e... tomorrow for Russia, let's say, politics like that. Well, like here, maybe not a very good example, but that predictability and stability, really.

M: Thank you. LTFG1_M2?

LTFG1_M2: I'm positive about that too, and very positive. And especially positive when looking from the perspective of that small country. And we would not have a lot of those decisions, a lot of things, because the interest groups, well, in small countries they are acting much stronger. And... well, as we were saying, you cannot go against some regulations, directives, no matter how much you want to. It is... there are dates set, and we do it this way and not the other way. What we, I don't know, would have not done for how many years, if nobody obliged us to do it, and would probably not have even started to do it. And now we do it. In our own way, in a different way, but still we do. There are clear boundaries, and we move on. In this regard, I am very positive. And to some extent, well, it is precisely because of that, that there is movement that is still going against interest groups.

M: Thank you. LTFG1_M1?

LTFG1_M1: It's... I'm also positive about being a part of the European Union. Also from personal experience, because I've dealt with it a lot, a lot, I can say that directly in practice and both personal and professional development I got exactly from our being, being a part of the European Union. That is, I have directly benefited [smiles], in practice, from being a part of it. Even, I have benefited before we became a country... we were a candidate country before that, and even since then they have contributed, while being so-called pre-accession countries [participant says “pre-accession countries” in English]. So, it is only positive.

M: Now, if we are a bit more specific. Well, it's a question for all. If somebody says, right, or you yourselves say, that membership in the European Union is beneficial for Lithuania. What benefits or the advantages you could list? Although you have already said some things, but perhaps there is something else?

LTFG1_F4: Well, if so-

LTFG1_M1: -Yes-

LTFG1_F4: -very sorry {to interrupt} [laughs]-

LTFG1_M1: -Nothing, everything is fine.

LTFG1_F4: If to say it very specifically, it's the financial benefits, I think. Moral. Well, and in terms of security. Well. Just the benefits, just the good [smiles].

M: And the moral - what do you mean?

LTFG1_F4: Well, we, someone here mentioned a little bit about the mentality, the same directives, right, that force us to behave in one way or another, in a way that we are not used to. But actually, well, it's also a change of mentality. Because that transformation from a Soviet Union mindset, communist, to a socially responsible or nature-responsible personality, it has to happen too. And in this case for certain, the directives of the European Union, as LTFG1_M2 said, they are contributing to this. (It is... well).

[from 00:26:54 to 00:30:50 LTFG1_M2 left the discussion and re-joined]

M: (Thank you). Yeah, you can go on, I'm sorry, I've interrupted here, we're kind of...

LTFG1_M1: Actually, there is this word that's come up, probably with the coming {of the EU}, that "cohesion". And in the same way, that cohesion allows us to... I think that just because we are part of the European Union, it allowed us to live the way we live now. Because without it, we really, both financially and as LTFG1_F4 said, in terms of attitude, that European, Western, towards where we want to go, we are actually almost here already. And all sorts of life challenges probably are easier for us to survive when being part of the EU. Like this.

M: LTFG1_M3?

LTFG1_M3: Yeah, and I would practically just follow up on LTFG1_M1 point that, well, let's just say, I'm thinking now what is, well, maybe even personally, it's about working activity, it is actually much, well, much easier, let's say. If you had to communicate outside the European Union, especially where, say, for example, Russia, Belarus, then it's quite different, very different, let's say, and the same... business is done differently, and you have much, much more complexity, there are many nuances. The European Union, let's say, Norway, Sweden, as far as I have had contact, everything is clear, everything is simple, practically you talk straightforward. Well, that mentality, well... well, you can't say that it's completely similar, but it's more simple. And that is really nice, and well, more simple and, let's say, the whole activity is more simple. That is a very big plus here.

M: LTFG1_M1, you mentioned that notion of cohesion, right. What does it mean to you?

LTFG1_M1: It's from... that e... coming closer (OL: artėjimas). Let's say, for me, it means exactly that, that once upon a time, once upon a time in the very beginning, before accession or just after accession, in reality those differences between countries, right, between those so-called developed countries, between the Germans, the French, those old member countries, the differences were obvious {meaning the differences between the old and the new members}. And really, those projects, n's of projects, starting from all kinds of infrastructure projects and finishing with social projects, we can say that after those practically, how many now, soon it will be 18 years, we are not so different. And in terms of living standards. Maybe salaries differ a little, but that is just details in principle. So, this coming closer turned to be effective. I think... I think it's more effective than negative. We're closer to them, and we... After all, we ourselves when we go to the same countries, we don't feel like we did in 2004. We feel much more free. It's that cohesion, we kind of got close (OL: susiglaudėme) with the old Europe, let's call it so.

[00:30:50]

M: LTFG1_F4, LTFG1_M3, how about that notion of cohesion, does it say something to you?

LTFG1_F4: Well, it's very, very similar to what LTFG1_M1 said. That's actually what cohesion means. It's huddling (OL: susiglaudimas), right. A kind of convergence (OL: suartėjimas), becoming similar (OL: supanašėjimas). Well, that's all... I agree with that.

M: LTFG1_M3?

LTFG1_M3: I... well, as far as... how, how that cohesion, well, I maybe... Let's say, as much as I used to interact, I used to in Russia, and in Belarus, and now of course I have to interact more on the other side, basically that cohesion, in my understanding, it depends very much on the political information, on what is around on the air. Because, for example, with the Belarusians - great people really [smiles]. Everything, everything is very easy, very... well, let's say, if you interact. If, if you don't look at, say, the nuances of the business, and there is, say, the politics, the current politics, which is hanging over the heads, over the people. So it happens so, that either the politics brings those people together {"coheses" people (OL: suglaudina)} or it can push them apart to other sides, even though those people are practically, well, I don't know, to me they're very similar everywhere. The same problems, the same troubles. That's... Let's say, because in the European Union we have, like, one common politics, common idea, and automatically we thus go towards each other. But a little, actually, it's very sad somehow that the same neighbours are now [laughs] going the other way, and that, and the interaction is becoming a little bit different.

M: Which neighbours are you talking about?

LTFG1_M3: The same Belarus. Or in Russia there are some acquaintances, let's say. Well, just out of nowhere, even strangely, as I said, when you talk a little bit, it seems like, well, like they are acquaintances and everything, but, you know, from the, purely from that informational, the information that is given {to them}, it is just being put up together, people are being programmed. Of course, we also get some, well, probably objective information doesn't exist. We also see certain kind of a picture, maybe a more straightforward, less straightforward picture. Let's say. That's it. That kind of cohesion.

M: Thank you. LTFG1_M2, since you've disappeared, now there are two questions in one place for you, okay. So what other advantages or benefits for Lithuania, in Lithuania's membership of the European Union could you name?

LTFG1_M2: Benefits or advantages? Wherever you look, there are almost everywhere benefits. I don't even know. Many things already have been mentioned and I don't see anything to single out. Like I said, positively and just the benefits, they are... big. Well, how big - in all areas, including in science, right. I study a lot myself, maybe I'm a bit limited in terms of travelling by those programmes, well, that are provided, but I can see my study mates using them. Here I am now for the second time, well, {I had} one higher education, then another elsewhere. And now the possibilities are there. They are given, let's move, let's do. So I say, wherever you look, you can see the benefits and there are many. That's it.

M: And now LTFG1_M1 mentioned this notion of cohesion, which is associated with the European Union-

LTFG1_M2: -About cohesion, I fully agree with LTFG1_M1, I agree. It's just that maybe for us it's more like, well, while he was talking, from that perspective, yeah, while we're small and we're making after {chasing} something, so for the one who is weaker, that cohesion, maybe that connection is felt more, and for the stronger one, it's an interesting question, whether it's... If we did that survey in Germany, would they feel that cohesion? [smiles] In my opinion, no. [laughs] But it's just a reflection and a thought. That's it.

M: Why do you think that, say, the big countries would feel that cohesion differently?

LTFG1_M2: It's always like that, maybe from the psychology of the people. That the weaker one will always put more emphasis on that bond with the stronger one, yeah. Well, him, how shall I put it, for the stronger one, well... is not relevant that cohesion, well, that kind of, how to say, well, not those thoughts {meaning the strong does not think much of cohesion}. That's how, that's just how I think. That's it.

M: Thank you. And now if I asked the other way round. If someone said that the membership... EU membership is disadvantageous for Lithuania, what could be the disadvantages?

(short pause)

LTFG1_F4: Well, the disadvantages are only what the obligations are. Because we are talking about what benefits us, what we get, but e... well, we are not talking about what we have committed to the European Union, right. And those same, for example, that all funding of infrastructure, right, they will not be there all the time. There will come a time when they will stop. Other countries will join the European Union and they will need help, and then WE will have to help. So maybe then this disadvantage will start to emerge. Now, about that, we do not see it yet.

LTFG1_M2: But here again, with that help, I would dare to, well, how shall I say, object, because if you look deeper into the Euro {European Union}, right, and how everything is born, it's still, whatever it is, the money flows... are directed, well, we set our priorities, right, what we are going to do, what do we want to achieve, well, at the European Union level, and those money flows are directed, here or there. I don't think it's just the collection that's going on here, because money is being printed, right. It is the idea that, well, that helping and collecting from other countries is less at play here, I think, than just putting together where we are going to go and then looking for that money.

LTFG1_F4: Well, what concerns those disadvantages, for example, as I imagine, both that free movement and those, say, payments to the European Union, right, why the Great [laughs] left... Great England [laughs], Brexit, why did it happen? Isn't that the reason? (short pause) It's just because it was strong financially, right, that's different... Germany also is {strong}, but different interests {interests different than those of UK}. But... well, that's where we find ourselves, for now we are on the side where we are supported. That's it. The minuses, the minuses may come when we have to pay more than we get in terms of support.

M: Thank you. What do you think, LTFG1_M3, what would those disadvantages be, or some reaction to what colleagues have said?

LTFG1_M3: I can't think of anything much more clever, no, not really. In practice, yes, what LTFG1_F4 said, in fact, what is currently, I am not going to repeat it, I just agree with it, with that opinion and that's it. Of course, maybe, say, I would like that, on the one hand, that some decisions were made more flexibly, those, let's say, what is relevant to us. Less coordinating with other countries. O... And conversely, then, let's say, for example, where are Germany's interests, well, I would like that they do not forget us. But it probably won't work out any other way, let's say, as it is now.

M: LTFG1_M1?

LTFG1_M1: It's practically that the colleagues listed everything. And... yeah, and what made those [laughs] those Brits to run away, I think that there was a part of propaganda, and let's say, we look at them now, we see, we see that they have issues no longer being a part of the European Union. Obviously, the future will show whether this is good or bad, but I think that in that matter of Brexit itself, it motivates, let's say, other countries in a completely different way now. Perhaps their solution would be... it wouldn't be the same as it was, as the British decided. That's it. It's, it's like... Obviously, we can discuss here, everybody would have their own opinion, but I think that as LTFG1_M3 said, there is a part of the propaganda, what they see, what they were shown. They have been persuaded that they are rich and that they can survive on their own. Although, as we can see for ourselves, what a crisis they faced afterwards. And that exit, that Brexit, it has been going on for many years, because those benefits have been quite substantial. Let's say, they not only paid, but they also received those benefits. So, here is the kind of, you know, we can, we can talk about it for an hour and a half. But... I guess that's all I wanted to say, yeah. Anyway, I agree with the colleagues.

[00:41:14]

LTFG1_F4: Well, I would like to mention one more minus or disadvantage, so to say, if we look at current times, not looking forward, when thinking will have changed and everything else. So there are like moral convictions, right. As far as it concerns all these conventions {meaning the Istanbul Convention} on gender, on relationships, on naming or not naming. And when... Well, anyway, with our, I don't even know, more conservative countries, well, that's a challenge for {them}. When there is... it starts to feel, maybe this is also propaganda, they start to feel pressured to accept some kind of laws that are against their morals or beliefs of some kind. That's it. That's why, for example, in Lithuania, there is this discussion about legalising {legitimising} same-sex relationships and so on. Well, if you go to Germany or France, there does not seem to be the same kind of debate as in our country, very strong {debates}. That's it.

M: Thank you. Now we will move on, we'll have three situations, slightly different, right. One of them is the following. Imagine that there is a major natural disaster in one of the European Union countries. Let's say an earthquake, a flood or a forest fire. How should the European Union as an institution react?

LTFG1_M1: Well [smiles], here I am now. I mean, there have already been those natural disasters. And there at the Germans, and at the Greeks, the Portuguese. There were burning, forests were burning. And... that reaction, I think it is quite clear. That as an institution itself, I imagine, there is a kind of crisis fund, which has dedicated funds for such, extra cases. Oh, and the other part of it is that if there is a need for technical or some kind of physical help, then I think every country contributes to that all the time. It seems to me that somehow, with these natural disasters, that help comes quickly enough. Even if you think about the European Union itself and those neighbouring countries, when there is some kind of emergency, they {the EU} are happy to help, and to neighbours {means also countries outside the EU}, or anywhere in the world. So, at this point somehow it is very clear to me. That we help and if we need it, we would get the same help.

M: How the others see it?

LTFG1_F4: Well yes, I agree, I agree too. Because actually, as far as I have heard reports, they always address to the same European Union, to the Commission and ask for help, physical, humanitarian, whatever, and they don't have any problems. At least I do not know.

M: Do LTFG1_M3 and LTFG1_M2 have anything to add here?

LTFG1_M3: Well, maybe not much here [smiles], just to give you an example, that for example, in the case of a fire in an apartment block, the fire brigade is going straight through. Wherever there is a fire, wherever there is, let's say, a fire. They do not coordinate, let's say, whether it's okay to open a door or not. They just go, they break it down, and then afterwards, say, later on, when the fire is out, then they work out the cost of the door and who should compensate it. This is practically what is in the European Union, I imagine, and yes, that is probably the way it is, and that is the way it has to be, and let's say in the event of a natural disaster, to try to help as quickly as possible and, let's say, to provide some material resources.

M: And if we talk about individual countries of the European Union, how should other countries react?

LTFG1_F4: Certainly to help [smiles]. All the time, we send humanitarian aid, and not only to European Union countries, if there is a disaster, but even... well, to other countries as well. Somehow it seems that it cannot be any other way.

LTFG1_M3: It's probably not so much that it's the European Union, it's not the European Union, it's just that common humanity.

LTFG1_F4: Yes, yes.

LTFG1_M1: Yeah, usually governments. As much as I can remember the last few cases, the government of each country decides very quickly how it can help and and then sends it there. If there is a need for medics, or firemen, or if there is a need for, let's say, helicopters, or some other kind of equipment. So they {national governments} send that help quickly enough. I think it is up to the governments of the European Union to decide, that's all.

M: Maybe some European Union countries should do a bit more than others in this situation?

LTFG1_M3: Maybe the principle of proportionality should apply. Probably so. Somehow-

LTFG1_F4: -I think both proportionality, and from the other side, for example, also - if there is a forest burning here in Latvia, on the border of Lithuania, so the Lithuanian firefighters will jump and go extinguishing. Because Latvia is on fire, so Lithuania will be on fire soon too.

LTFG1_M3: Well, yes.

LTFG1_F4: Yes, yes. So here too, well, who can do what, I think, like this. I don't think there's really any argument about whether I am sending one soldier instead of two.

M: LTFG1_M2?

LTFG1_M2: I want to interject. But does the European Union decide at all? They don't really deal with those issues there, it's up to the states themselves to decide who helps whom and how much. Because there is kind of no obligation {means that there is no formal EU level obligation} that you have to help that neighbour. Well, in principle.

M: And let's say Lithuania, right, how should it react?

LTFG1_F4: The way it reacts, the way it behaves by now, the way it should behave, I think [smiles]. Because Lithuania is really contributing to all these calls for help and I'm kind of glad that Lithuania is involved in all of them. In those {aid calls}. And even initiates sometimes giving that aid.

M: Are there any other thoughts on Lithuania's contribution?

LTFG1_M1: No. They {Lithuania} do everything right.

M: Now, to consider this: if Lithuania were to send a crisis management team to that country, let's say firefighters and doctors, do you think Lithuania should do that, and who would have to cover the costs of that help?

LTFG1_F4: I think that they should send and the costs can be covered partly by the Lithuanian state and partly by the European Union. Because there is more than one team being sent there anyway, from several countries. It's not like it's just Lithuanians going and rescuing someone.

M: How others see it?

LTFG1_M3: I would also agree that they should definitely go, if they have the competence, if they can, for example, like a fire brigade team, for example, in order to manage it faster, then definitely. Because if we look on a more global scale, even if there is a forest burning 1 000 kilometres away, the wind is going to blow the smoke our way and we are going to breathe it. It's, well, it's still a common round house here.

M: Do you think you personally have an obligation to help in case of such a disaster?

LTFG1_M1: Well, if we have the competence and we can, we can help, then of course, why not. I mean, it's a very human thing, in practice, these emergencies. I mean, if you really can, or if you're some kind of a professional, I think that just... that really. If I just could, I would help.

[00:50:27]

M: LTFG1_F4?

LTFG1_F4: I don't know if I would directly. I mean, it's like he said - if you're a professional in that field and they send you there, of course I would be involved. But since I'm not, then it's indirect help, that is - it's just through my taxes. I pay taxes to the state and some of that money might go to that help as well. It's hard to say.

M: LTFG1_M2?

LTFG1_M2: No, it's through taxes, I can't really imagine it {any other way}. Hold on, hold on [adjusts microphone]. What I understand, there is no really such a thing as a free help. It's still paid for by somebody. It doesn't happen that way. That those missions, everything else, well, well, I personally haven't heard such instances that they go, that those crisis management centres of some kind, or the border guards there, there are those missions, to help. Just like that - unpaid. Everybody goes with compensation.

LTFG1_F4: So they are paid, our state pays.

LTFG1_M2: Right.

LTFG1_F4: If we send, the firefighters themselves will not just decide and go. "We're going to rescue". (It's still the state that sends.)

LTFG1_M2: (That's what we're talking about).

LTFG1_F4: (The state pays for it).

LTFG1_M2: (Well, and we do anyway), everyone who is working, well, doing something, paying those taxes, well, contributes to it.

LTFG1_F4: Well, yes.

M: LTFG1_M3, do you have anything to add?

LTFG1_M3: Not that much. I mean, maybe we should take here a specific case. But anyway, through money, through taxes. And if there's something like that going on nearby, say, maybe you just have to take a shovel in your hands and go dig that sand. And {contribute} in such a way.

M: Thank you. Now the next one, another situation. If an economic crisis like the one we had in 2008-2009, right, they also call it the euro crisis, were to happen again. And some European countries would be particularly adversely affected or would be more affected than others, how should Lithuania react and behave?

(short pause)

M: LTFG1_M2 is laughing, I see? [laughs]

LTFG1_F4: It's just that I, I think that Lithuania is too small yet, and it's not rich enough yet, to be able to react in any special way, compared to other countries. Or by the general consensus of the European Union. Yes, if the European Union then distributes that budget, or finances {the help}, so well, we might just lose some of that money that was allocated for something, because it will go to rescue another country. So the only thing we can do - not to be angry about it. That's all.

LTFG1_M1: Well, yes. Realistically, that's how it was. When there were these crises now, later on, when the Greeks were being rescued, so that they wouldn't go bankrupt there. So that's how it was, that there were some funding cuts, and that's how we contributed. So, I agree completely with LTFG1_F4. Because well, here is the real... a real example. And the {EU} itself, as far as I know, there in the European Investment Bank, and some others, they have until today, they have this very funny naming [smiles], something like "Help a Greek". So, there are plenty of those projects till today [laughs]. It's, well, it's happening. And yes, so that's how we contribute. In the sense that we don't get something somewhere, then the country itself {which didn't get something} has to, in order to implement a project, has to look for the {funds} itself... In the end, there are always either those loans or something else. And the forms of financing and project implementation, you can find different forms. Probably so. The way it was done in 2008-2009, that way we should probably do now. After all, now there has been this pandemic crisis. It was also somehow managed by those... the Commission itself gives the sources of funding. Well, somehow it is happening. It would be happening now if there was a crisis as well.

M: LTFG1_M3?

LTFG1_M3: [sighs] It seems that if, say, a country goes bankrupt or is in a big financial hole, it probably needs to be rescued. Even though then the economic level, let's say, falls for everybody, more or less accordingly. But apparently if left to its fate, it would be even worse, I would say. Because businesses would collapse, some markets would collapse, people's lives would collapse, there would be internal migration, there would be crime, and the same maybe Greeks would come to us here, say, to bring cars to themselves [smiles]. Well, I'm joking here. But anyway, it would affect us. For example, I think it was in Iceland, there was a crisis there, too, and the bank played very big, and practically, if I am not mistaken, the whole country was very badly affected. Just because of a certain e... let's say, the machinations of a financial group. Well. So in any case, it must be rescued. Apparently there is no other, no other option. Although, from the other side, you think, "Well, why does it have to be on my account?". But in the end everyone will be much worse off {meaning that if we don't help}. Either everybody is slightly worse off {if we help}, or everybody is much worse off {if we don't help}.

M: LTFG1_M2, what do you think Lithuania should do if a crisis hits a country very hard?

LTFG1_M2: If we are in the European Union, and you say some country is going to be hit very hard, then we will be hit very hard as well. That is my opinion. [smiles] Because everyone is too nicely tied up. It's... And the problems will still be somewhat systemic, not just like Petras is angry with Jonas and so on. And a... it will still be the European Union's own decisions, how to solve it, how to deal with it, not us Lithuanians deciding that we can save someone. No no no I don't think that, well, how to say, if it didn't, no, it didn't start with us, well, I doubt that we can somehow deal with it. So there you go, that's my opinion.

M: Now a related question. Again, would Lithuania's reaction differ in any way depending on which affected country we are talking about?

LTFG1_M1: I think from... it wouldn't change very much in principle, but it would change when there were... if it were about our neighbours. Let's say, Latvians, Estonians. Those who are nearby, probably. Well, as they say, the nearest neighbour is still maybe a bit more important. Well, I would like to say that in general it would not make a difference. But I think that internally, well, we would probably be more active in seeking help for the country next to us.

LTFG1_M3: Yeah. The ones who are giving low scores in Eurovision, it would be harder to really go and rescue them [laughs]. I would agree with LTFG1_M1. And actually, maybe even some historical, let's say, sediments remain, they would probably affect too. There, for example, that maybe they need less or we should help them less. Yes. I would also agree.

M: LTFG1_F4, what do you think?

LTFG1_F4: Well, I might... I was thinking, my first thought was, and what if Germany went bankrupt? What would we do then, I wonder? I think we would be scared [laughs]. Because it's a big, strong state and suddenly it gets bad. I wonder if we can help it? Where there are small countries, well, it seems, so what? It's no big deal {if they are in trouble}. Some {help} for one, it {a small country} does not need much help. But a country like Germany, and goes bankrupt. Maybe it would even seem to us - it's not bankruptcy at all [laughs], it's just that they are coming down to live at our level. And for them it is bankrupt. So how, how would we react then? I don't know.

LTFG1_M3: LTFG1_F4, and this thought popped into my head - I guess it depends on the situation. If it's financially, then we're probably not doing anything, well, no wind to blow at all {meaning that Lithuania would not have the capacity to help financially such a big country as Germany}. But if they have some kind of crisis and all the groundwater disappears, then we could really help a lot. Because I think in Europe we are maybe third in terms of groundwater there.

LTFG1_F4: Well, yeah, except for what we have a lot of [laughs] {we can help with that}.

LTFG1_M2: Groundwater, I think, aren't we the first?

LTFG1_M3: Well, I don't know.

LTFG1_M1: We are the first. I know that. By underground. Not ground {water}. Groundwater is... Artesian water.

LTFG1_M3: Yeah, yeah, underground water.

LTFG1_M2: Underground water, yeah, yeah.

[01:00:17]

M: LTFG1_M2, as like-

LTFG1_F4: -Then we'll think that we're not going to have enough of it {underground water} ourselves [laughs]. Germany is big [laughs]. A Lithuanian is still a bit of a scrooge.

M: LTFG1_M2, do you think that Lithuania’s reaction would be different depending on which country we are talking about?

LTFG1_M2: There is some lagging on my side, I hear very bad.

M: Oh, and I am lagging as well. ((Moderator repeats the question for LTFG1_M2))

(long pause) [There seems to be a connection glitch on LTFG1_M2 side]

M: OK, aha.

(long pause) [There seems to be a connection glitch on LTFG1_M2 side]

LTFG1_M2: ((Repeats, that could not understand question because of connection issues))

((LTFG1_M2 and moderator agree that LTFG1_M2 will switch off video screen to improve the connection. Moderator repeats the question)))

LTFG1_M2: Not sure... I don't think so. I mean, this is a European Union country we're talking about, right?

M: Yes.

LTFG1_M2: Well, in my opinion, it shouldn't be any different. But how these things will be politicised and so on, I have no idea [smiles]. Especially judging by these days.

M: And if the crisis were to hit Lithuania very hard, how should other European Union countries react?

LTFG1_F4: Rescue [laughs].

LTFG1_M1: Yes, they should pay more attention than we pay to others [laughs].

LTFG1_M3: [laughs] Yeah.

LTFG1_F4: Yes, because we have a lot of underground water [laughs].

LTFG1_M3: [laughs]. As they say, when it hurts to you, it hurts the most. That's it.

LTFG1_F4: Yes

M: If, say, Lithuania received that financial support from other countries, would we have to obey certain restrictions and rules that come with that support?

LTFG1_M2: But we do obey. Because even that support conditionally comes with rules. What to do and how. And until... Of course, as long as we... because as far as I understand, still those projects, neither they interrupt, nor something, they are going in a certain direction and you, either you are developed or undeveloped, you take part in it the same way, in regard to that funding, and we go on with it.

M: How do others see it?

LTFG1_F4: You can't do anything about it, if the support only comes with requirements, and you need it. That's what happened with that migrant crisis now, right, and there was funding, but they didn't allow the money to be used to build that physical wall. Well, then, yes, you distribute accordingly... for other things. Well, where needed. Oh, what - we don't... we don't have a choice in that respect. If we had two sources of funding - the European Union and Russia, for example. And different requirements [laughs], which might be preferable for us. The question is whether we would really take that funding from Russia. Because simply. Because if we ourselves were to give some financial support, for specific things, our aim would be so that it was to be used for those things and not for something else. So you define the conditions. Of course.

M: LTFG1_M3?

LTFG1_M3: I mean if, well, I have very, very little information, I don't deal with these projects. Of course, I can see the signs {"funded by the EU”}, but, uh... If money is coming for something, well, it should be evaluated in terms of those conditions. If it is possible to evaluate them and choose. Whether it comes from the European Union or not, they have to be evaluated. Well, that still, that to maintain some kind of self-interest and freedom of manoeuvre, as much as possible. As much as possible, let's say, well... in coordinating with the same European Union. But completely blindly, just to take the money and accept all the conditions... Well, I'm in favour of maintaining as much as possible the freedom of decision and, let's say, overall freedom of some kind, at least where you live.

M: LTFG1_M1, what do you think?

LTFG1_M1: I think that the financial principles, they work everywhere. Let's say, well, it's not that... those... well, free cheese is only in mousetraps.

LTFG1_M3: Yeah.

LTFG1_M1: So, everywhere there are, there are conditions and all the time you choose. If you're in trouble and you need to be rescued, you still don't put your head in the trap, anyway. And still, there will be some conditions. It's just like when you want to buy something yourself, you pick a few offers and choose the one that suits you best. That's probably the same case with the state. Since the state is populated by people, I think that those financial principles are the same, they work. There are conditions all the time.

M: Thank you. Well, one more situation. Well, we all know that there are inequalities between countries and also inequalities between people within countries. Do you think that the European Union should have some kind of common programme or fund to reduce social inequalities? Or not? Having in mind growing income gap in societies and so on? Should there be or not and why?

LTFG1_F4: Doesn't it have it already? [laughs]

LTFG1_M1: They do have it, right? [laughs]

LTFG1_F4: It seems to me that there is?

LTFG1_M2: No, I don't think so.

LTFG1_F4: What do you mean, no? [laughs] There is something, there must be.

M: Well ok, you think that, let's say, there is, right. That's your initial reaction. Why does it seem that way to you? Why do you feel that there is such a thing as a reduction of inequality on the part of the European Union?

LTFG1_M2: To me, why it seems that there is no {such programme}, because there is no yet uniformity on what it is. Well, poverty. For a German there is one kind of poverty, for us it's another kind of poverty. Is that social... well, in the sense of, well, you know what I mean. It's not until we have that {unified understanding}, until then we can't talk about that thing {social equality}.

M: You mean, LTFG1_M2, that... I'm sorry... Do you mean, LTFG1_M2, that the disparities are too big for now, or what?

LTFG1_M2: Well I think so, yes.

LTFG1_F4: E... it's definitely not going to be equal, uniform everywhere, that's the idea of communism. But that social, well, there are still social projects going on, too, with the European Union funding. There are. What are they for? That's what they are for, to reduce social exclusion, right. It is not specifically to fund increase of incomes for people. But they are providing opportunities for learning. Well, I think, there are these... this fund. Well, not a fund maybe, but there are money at least (allocated for that).

LTFG1_M3: (Programmes). Yeah.

LTFG1_F4: Programmes, yes. Those all kinds of projects.

LTFG1_M3: Because I've heard that programmes like that, let's say, to get people involved, let's say there... e... and let's say in some groups to do something... To learn, like... That's probably the only way.

LTFG1_F4: That's the way to go. Because those financial benefits, the cash benefits, that's completely pointless.

LTFG1_M3: Temporar, yes.

LTFG1_F4: Yes. And the encouragement to learn, the same activities for children, they are also from the European Union, projects are written and that funding is received. Of course... There are those measures I think, anyway.

M: LTFG1_M1, what do you think? You also said that everything is there already [laughs].

[01:09:46]

LTFG1_M1: There is actually, everything is up and running. And those employment problems are being addressed. By teaching new professions, specialties. It's like that, when one acquires {a new profession} and {unemployment} is reduced at the same time. So if you don't find a job while you're there... of certain spec... profession, and you get a chance and they pay for that education, you get a chance to continue to work, to earn, and to live with dignity. So I think there are a lot more of those programmes at the moment, I would think. Because in the beginning it was all, all the concentration of funding from the European Union was on those big projects. On those wastewater cleaning facilities, and the landfills, the maintenance of landfills, and the roads, the pipelines. And now, just now, for the last 7-5 years now, the biggest emphasis has been on those projects to reduce social exclusion. Through all kinds of education. So I think that it's working.

LTFG1_M2: But that's for us, as far as I understand it. That... Because that of wastewater, it was one of the main, the biggest projects here, that wastewater management. And now the social, you see, I personally haven't been very much interested in the European Union in that particular social policy and e... We ourselves have a lot of influence, as far as I can see, on where to direct that social side. Is that not a right understanding? Is my understanding off, M? Which way to go - there is no much strong guidance from the European Union.

M: You mean, that it is left up to the member state to decide, right, how it deals with that social {support}?

LTFG1_M2: To very, very large extent it is left to the state to decide.

M: But maybe that's a good thing?

LTFG1_M2: It depends.

LTFG1_F4: Well, I... I don't know specifically about those, I haven't come across those either, those measures from the European Union in terms of social, I mean, that whole funding, implementation. But let's say, personally, I've come across, I've got an offer to retrain as an IT specialist. And if I study and, within three months, I get a job in an IT company, all my education is paid for by European Union funds. This gives me the opportunity to change my profession, if I want to, right, and it also helps me to get employed. Well, and if I am not happy with my salary, with my job, I can change it, and here you go, there are measures. This is just... just one that I came across. I think there are more of them, but maybe like there are those billboards by the streets {"funded by the EU”}, right, maybe for these {social programs} there are no billboards. There should be more of that information. This is where we Lithuanians have a problem with communication. But well, whoever is interested, he/she is interested in it.

LTFG1_M1: There is actually a lot of communication. But only if you are interested. There is even one page - EU investments - all the information is there. And you can also find information about... Here, yes, that's a bit to the side. There are programming periods under which funds are allocated. And because these are state projects, and there is each ministry responsible for its own area, and they write all the priorities. So, what happens nowadays is, well, that programming period is announced, and everybody can apply. And, let's say, the educational or the scientific institutions, they say their needs, or they say their wishes, well, and then they get those finances. And in the same way, because we have already got that infrastructure pretty well sorted out, the share of that is decreasing, and at the same time the share of the social matters is increasing. So, it is all happening. Oh, and we live through... times of information overload, so it's the same way, as long as we're not interested, we don't look for information. And when we are interested, we can find it easily enough. And there is plenty of it. It's just that, well... Even though there are, and there are also on TV, these social advertisements of some kind, information. Now I've seen about, about housing renovation, they are activating all those things. Well, somehow it all is happening. At least I see that information.

M: And I'll be very brief so that we can move on. But LTFG1_M2 at the very beginning even mentioned that there are some huge differences between the countries of the European Union, right? Say, that poverty in Germany is not the same as poverty in Lithuania. What do you think this means for the European Union as a whole or on a large scale?

LTFG1_M3: I think, for example, say poverty and alongside it, say... and crime, and that crime is exported from Lithuania to other countries, rich countries. Because, for example, I had a conversation with a Norwegian, and he says, we are most afraid of Lithuanians [laughs], at least previously, he says. And so, as before, on that social exclusion, the reduction of social exclusion, I think that is one of the problematic spheres, for example, in Lithuania, I think education is a problem nowadays. It has been there constantly under reformation, and as far as I understand it, it is still not very effective. Because the results show that. And for example, there could be, let's say, in the European Union itself, a kind of, well, not a standard, but for example, from a country that is doing well in the education system, just to put its experience on a spot and to say, "Look, maybe use that experience". For example, as a simple example, let's say, take a translated, let's say, mechanical engineering textbook from German. And take many textbooks published in Lithuania. There at Kaunas University of Technology. The level of information is completely different. There, you read the German, and everything is clear. Unfortunately, in Lithuania it is very poor, let's say, with, with the same information, let's say. It's just a small country, little, little experience. That's it. I think, like... let's say, for the reduction of that social exclusion, well, it should be linked with the education system, to that transfer of that experience. And maybe for Lithuania itself, for example, to benefit from that.

LTFG1_F4: (Me too)

M: (How do others see it?) Mh.

LTFG1_F4: I agree that to reduce the social {exclusion} we precisely need to invest in education. It reminded a little bit of one thing that I read. There was an experience in America, back in the day. I mean, there was a huge infant mortality. In the final version, how they solved that chain, what starts with what, the state decided to finance, in other words, to invest, in teacher education. To educate girls on how to eat healthily so that healthy babies are born. Not in supporting mothers, with food, or anything else. It's like the next time here - it's like, well, if we want to help, so we need to get that e... Well, everything is ok with the “Food Bank”. But it doesn't... it's not the main reason. We can give food to a person, but we can then feed them for life. Well. And you have to look for the roots. It's education, that's really the main thing.

LTFG1_M3: Yeah. I totally agree with that.

LTFG1_M2: I agree that education is the main thing. But I don't know if the European Union can do anything here. I mean, we know the problem, we know what's going on, but that's just the way it is. There is still this ministry, there are politicians, but they are just not solving the problem. So it's not even, I don't know if the European Union can do something, well, in a sense... If other countries {in the EU} are doing well on this issue, it is not, it is not a priority for the European Union to solve the problem of one country. And there are examples, there is funding, but if we don't deal with it, I don't think the European Union will have any influence, it will say, "Oh, you sort it out, make your education work." Because the examples here and the people you talk to, the teachers, the professors, everybody knows that you can set a good example. Especially now was a good time, because there was online teaching, you can take... You don't even have to do it in Europe, you can take the same examples of good teachers in Lithuania and show them as an example. But everybody knows, but nobody, I don't know, for what reason, doesn't deal with it. Because I know that when new teachers come, they would like to get some guidelines on how to do it, how to do it there, they don't get those guidelines. It's just, I have no idea whether people don't demand, well, and it's fine for everyone. Or... no, no, I don't know how to even describe that thing. That's why it happens. Because it's like everybody understands, but nobody does it.

[01:20:58]

M: Thank you. Now a related question maybe, with that social inequality. Should the European Union have a European level programme to tackle unemployment in all countries, again, funded by the European Union as a whole?

(short pause)

LTFG1_F4: No? [laughs]

M: Why?

LTFG1_F4: [laughs] (short pause) Somehow it seems to me that this is very... Anyway, the state... we are very different countries and the reasons for unemployment are also very different, so... Maybe there might be some kind of programme from the European Union, but how to deal with it {the problem of unemployment} should still be up to the state itself to find the ways. Because I think there is no one-size-fits-all plan... I don't think it's possible.

M: LTFG1_M1 is smiling, I see?

LTFG1_M1: Well, yeah, I don't know whether we need a programme or not, but in principle, in the very, the very treaty of the European Union, it is written that there is free movement of labour force. So the solution is already there [laughs]. In that sense, every citizen of the European Union can, can go to work in another country. So that's it, that can solve unemployment. Oh, and anyway, I guess that, well, if a person doesn't want to go anywhere, then maybe the unemployment should be solved by that state. His own state should decide. Well, that's two... yeah. I would need... I would need more information about what kind of programme it would be and how it would deal with, deal with unemployment. With more information, I could then say whether I am for it or against it. Right now, I do not know.

LTFG1_M2: But anyway, for example, from LTFG1_M1 the idea is kind of interesting. Maybe it's, well, in the sense of, like, the state itself deciding, but in terms of the movement, well, it's clearly the market dictating here. A lot of agencies have sprung up, these so-called intermediaries, who are out there cheating and all that. So maybe some kind of a European Union-level assistance to help those people to find somewhere to work would be an interesting option.

M: LTFG1_M3?

LTFG1_M3: Well, in a way that's maybe a bit utopian in terms of ideas, but I think that there should be some kind of one strategy developed. Tactically, then each country would have to, let's say, decide, adapt. Because, well... e... let's say, a common market, but of course movement and the fact that if a person is able, if he wants to, maybe next time he will be forced to go to a place that pays more, but if you look at the periphery of Lithuania, the small towns, it's a very sad, very sad picture. In practice, there are very, very few young people in, say, small towns. And so, let's say that, well, still, financially, let's say, pensions still have to be paid, still have to be earned here. So there should be some kind of a strategy to make sure that it's still e... there would be, let's say, some... where it is possible, where it is appropriate, for certain industries or activities, just to have a little bit of a... well, supported, encouraged to develop in those, in those regions those industries. Because when there's some kind of, if it's a big, not a factory, but a big kind of activity then it gets surrounded by smaller ones. And when there are activities, then there, let's say, people are coming in, then kindergartens are created, and then there is life in the schools. Well, in that sense, life is moving. So I think that anyway there should be some kind of common strategy, to see the whole, the whole European Union, like, the movement. Because it's still, well, {the EU is} like a single country. And let's say the same heartland, Germany, but we need also that somewhere in there, let's say, that patch of skin, in Lithuania as well... would be healthy {provides an analogy of an organism}.

M: And if unemployment is particularly high in a country in the European Union, again, should the European Union itself try to reduce it in that country?

LTFG1_F4: Well, I would think that first of all the country itself should take care of this issue. Because how can the European Union reduce unemployment [laughing] if people don't want to work? They don't want to go elsewhere to work? Well, that's partly what the European Union is doing. If it provides funding for projects for retraining, for training, the aim is to get people to work later. This is where the state continues to... well... I have no idea. LTFG1_M3 talked about a common strategy. Well, what kind of strategy can there be? You can't tell a business that you do business here. In that country. Because there is high unemployment there. Business goes where it is better off. That is capitalism all over. In the Soviet Union, they used to build a factory in a flat field and then they built cities that are now dead. In the same Lithuania. Because that factory no longer exists.

LTFG1_M3: Well, I do not quite agree with LTFG1_F4... Let's say I agree on one (side).

LTFG1_M2: (I don't {agree with LTFG1_F4} either).

LTFG1_M3: On the other hand, let's say Kaunas FEZ. It has been there for maybe 25 years. I remember when it was a completely flat land, but the conditions were created and it grew bit by bit, so to speak. Now there is hardly any space where to build there. On the other hand, if you look at the situation with the lasers in Lithuania, and the policy with the Chinese, let us say, again, I would like to see support from the European Union, so that it did not kick Lithuania, as the Chinese do. There should be, there should be a strategy for that. So that if there is a clear decision, as Lithuania's, that we create Taipei, well, we allow to establish, it's a fact, it should be thought through, let's say, again, grounded, based on some kind of a strategy, and what the consequences will be after that.

M: LTFG1_M2, what do you think?

LTFG1_M2: LTFG1_M2 is a bit confused. But I'm also relatively opposed to LTFG1_F4 to some extent, because business goes where the money goes. So if you foresee certain projects and you give funding, that's where the business will come. Well, someone is going to take that money. It's a rule. So the European Union is really able to deal with those problems and something... Well, how to say, problems. You... If there are people out of work, well, it means, you can create something with them. And you can think about creating something in there. That's, I think you can solve that completely.

M: And, say, should Lithuania contribute to reducing unemployment in one of the European Union countries, even if, say, it means some additional costs for Lithuania?

LTFG1_M3: Maybe it depends on what the situation is like there. Let's say... If, for example, there is some kind of e... there was an earthquake in Greece, and there just collapsed, companies, and let's say people were out of work, because the infrastructure just collapsed. So, of course, directly, let's say, Lithuania has to help there to rebuild all that infrastructure. If economically, well, here again, let's say as much as we can, as much as we can influence.

[01:30:04]

M: LTFG1_M1, LTFG1_F4, what do you think?

LTFG1_M1: If it has to help, is that the question?

M: Well, let's say, yeah, specifically Lithuania for example, should it help in some way? Well, should it - should it reduce unemployment, should it contribute to reducing unemployment in some European Union country, because it is very high there?

LTFG1_M1: Well, in that sense [laughs] there could be all kinds of ways of reducing it. Let's say we have a factory, right, instead of, instead of inviting Ukrainians and Belarusians, we'd be happy to invite the Greeks there, so... we (like we could invite [starts laughing as LTFG1_F4 starts laughing]).

LTFG1_F4: ([laughs]).

LTFG1_M2: ([laughs]).

LTFG1_F4: I am not sure how it would be to put a Greek and a Ukrainian, who would lay the paving stones faster [laughs].

LTFG1_M1: But if there is, say, if it's like a total shit {situation}, then [smiling] a Greek could come here, if that's the case.

LTFG1_F4: [laughs].

LTFG1_M2: [laughs].

LTFG1_F4: I don't think so. Well, too... actually-

LTFG1_M1: -well, but let's say that would be one way of contributing. And the second way of contributing could be the way it probably already is. The financial one. It is already there, it is already agreed, so probably at some percentage some kind of help there appears, one way or another. So I think it should. Well, at least I imagine that there are schemes in place {in the EU} for how the money moves around and, although it is a small part of our share, there is help. So it means that Lithuania is also contributing. So I think it is contributing now, and it should contribute.

M: So we are slowly moving towards the end. And today we were discussing, we were discussing about the European Union, touching on different areas, whether it is social differences, let's say, the economy. Perhaps there are other areas that you think are important in terms of relations and mutual support within the European Union?

(short pause)

LTFG1_M3: [sighs].

LTFG1_F4: Culture.

M: What do you mean?

LTFG1_F4: Well, everything, like social life, like work, culture connects us. Still, the culture is different. After all, people from our culture go and show, and others come there. Well, this is also a sphere of interaction. Art, dance, music, everything is connected.

M: How do others see what else could be important in terms of relations, mutual support in the European Union between member states, I don't know, the citizens, the governments, something else?

(long pause)

LTFG1_F4: I think we've already named everything. [laughs] There's nothing else. (short pause) The space has now started, so there you go, support. To accept our astronauts, Lithuanian [laughs]. Under the new programmes.

M: How would you say all these topics that we have discussed today relate to the future of Lithuania in the European Union?

LTFG1_M3: How are they related?

M: Mh.

(long pause)

LTFG1_M1: Directly [laughs].

LTFG1_F4: Yes [laughs].

M: What do you mean?

LTFG1_M1: Well, that what is happening, what is going on maybe in different forms, different proportions, but all those parts are important. Maybe, in the same way, maybe, because we will have high-speed railways and smooth roads, we will have clean water, we will be able to dedicate to culture, something else. But in that sense, this process I think {it} is not complete. It will be permanent, we will always have things to do here as part of the European Union. I think, I do not see there any kind of end. That we will do everything here and then we will become uninteresting to each other. No. That togetherness is important to us, and I think that we will continue, we will continue to go as we are going. Maybe, maybe it will be wider.

M: LTFG1_F4?

LTFG1_F4: Well, I totally agree with LTFG1_M1 that actually we, at least for us as Lithuanians, it's not even the middle, it's still the very beginning of everything. We still have long, long way to go with the European Union.

M: LTFG1_M3?

LTFG1_M3: Well, what we were talking about here, it's all connected, it's all evolving, and what we were talking about at the very beginning - security, so what's going on around right now, either it is just an information noise, or it might happen so that we will have to test out that security. Lithuania is completely dependent on, say, large {countries}, on the whole of the European Union, and as they say, we are all on the same train, in the same carriage.

M: LTFG1_M2, what do you think?

(short pause)

LTFG1_M2: I'm out of ideas [laughs]. No, no. I agree actually. I agree and we're not going anywhere. And we took, how shall we say, we got help ourselves, no... the level has gone up, we have developed higher. Well, if we have to help somebody, we will help. And we will all go together. On the same train. That's it.

M: Very briefly, some addition - LTFG1_M1 mentioned the togetherness, right, in the European Union. What do you think about what that togetherness means in the European Union?

LTFG1_M3: Well, for me personally, for example, togetherness is getting along (OL: susikalbėjimas). That, let's say, mutual understanding with other people... well, from other countries. That when you talk, you understand his problems, he understands my problems. So that togetherness [smiles].

M: Do we have it in the European Union?

LTFG1_M3: M... In my opinion, well, as far as I'm concerned, from my personal experience, I think so. Yes. But yeah, but maybe it's, let's say, it depends very much on the qualities of the person, let's say. Because everybody is different and there are all kinds of people are everywhere. But that togetherness, I think it is there.

M: LTFG1_F4, what do you think?

LTFG1_F4: Well, I agree with LTFG1_M3, actually.

(short pause)

LTFG1_M2: Of course we do. Maybe not in all areas, but in the areas that are regulated, we do have that togetherness [laughs]. Because it can't be otherwise, well. And then there will always be those differences and that's cool and those differences are needed. But there are, there are ( ).

M: LTFG1_M1, when you were talking, you said that togetherness. What is that togetherness to you, or how do you see that togetherness in the European Union?

LTFG1_M1: I see it, because I have worked for a long time with the Italians, with the Dutch, with the Poles, with the Romanians, and with a lot of other different people, so in principle that togetherness is very, it helps us a lot, it helps us to deal with all the issues. It's easy to talk, because all the... Let's say those colleagues, it's just in those European projects that I meet them, all of them. It's very easy for us, it's very easy to communicate, to interact and I personally don't feel any difference. That maybe, maybe in the old days, you used to feel that - oh, so if there's, you know, a German here, or from that old Europe, then you're some bum from somewhere. That's not the case now. Now we are all, all of us one bunch, all of us with one goal and we are moving on. That is the togetherness. There is, let's say, well, here's my personal view, just like you, whether you're touring or going somewhere, you feel just fine everywhere. Wherever you are. Of course, like LTFG1_M2 said, there are all kinds of people everywhere. But that's the thing, there are all kinds of people here in Lithuania as well. You don't have to look far.

M: Thank you. So now, to sum up, a final comment from each of you, right, on what we have been discussing. About the European Union, about us in the European Union, right, about those European Union links. What would be your final comment in the discussion? I do not know who will start? Maybe LTFG1_M3, because before that I started with, I think I started with LTFG1_F4, so...

LTFG1_M3: Well, I'm [laughs] really satisfied to be living in the European Union. That's... and let's say, common processes, well, how, let's say, from the common man's understanding, vision, well, how the {process} moves one way or the other way. Let's say well... I hope that, let's say, in the direction of improvement. But for example, again, I see what has happened, what has been built, what has been done in Lithuania, there are some really good things, let's say with projects, everything. With a certain, let's say, people's movement, maybe I would like to see more of that... more action, in Lithuania itself. But there are processes that you can't stop, they are happening, and well, I think things are going normally. Let's say optimistically. There will be problems, but I think, let's say, if people want to come to an agreement, if they want to find a solution, let's say, they find it all the time. And the European Union - if they just talk, if they are willing to talk, let's say, they will definitely talk and they will find all the solutions to the problems.

M: LTFG1_F4?

LTFG1_F4: Well, I agree with LTFG1_M3, actually. And it seems to me that the togetherness comes from the fact that we want to have that togetherness. And we, as Lithuanians, who are experiencing the positive side of the European Union, we really WANT to be in the European Union because we see how much it gives us. Both personally and societally. It...

M: Thank you. LTFG1_M1?

LTFG1_M1: Yeah. Everything, I agree with my colleagues. Okay. I like it and I want to be here {in the EU} [smiles].

M: LTFG1_M2, what would be your summary?

LTFG1_M2: It's all good for me too [smiles]. And anyway, what can I say - it's all fine. If we live, how shall we say, e... well, if we're on the same continent, then we have to accept similar rules, so that we have similar responsibilities towards each other. That's it. That is my opinion.

M: Thank you. I don't know, maybe there's something again that I didn't ask about, we didn't discuss at all, but it was in the back of somebody's mind that there's another important aspect, but nobody asked?

(long pause).

M: Thank you very much then for the discussion. I'll stop the recording now.