M: I will ask you to take a piece of paper or open a text file.

SKFG2_F1: Oh, right, just a moment.

M: And wrote down the first three thoughts that come to your mind when you hear Europe or the European Union.

SKFG2_F1: Just a moment.

M: All right, all right.

(long pause)

M: So, SKFG2_F3, SKFG2_M2, do you want to start?

SKFG2_M2: [overlapping with SKFG2_F3]

SKFG2_F3: I can, yes, hello. Well, for me it is associated with the fact that it was a peace project, that it is a community of cooperating states, and I also associate it with support and with projects, because I have often cooperated in European Union projects.

M: Support and projects - what do you mean by that, can you elaborate, please?

SKFG2_F3: Financial support for various projects that are prioritised by national states but also by the European Union as a whole.

M: Mhm. Thank you. What are the projects aiming at?

SKFG2_F3: I personally focus on human rights, but I've also sort of worked on ecology or those environmental issues and also NGO cooperation, volunteering and it can also be support for science and research for sure, there are a lot of priorities that the European Union supports, and you don't have a chance to meet all of them.

M: Mhm. Thank you. SKFG2_M2.

SKFG2_M2: So, to me there is also something like ALLIANCE, which brings together different nations, to have, primarily, a sustainable geopolitical influence, to be able to compete with giants like China or the United States, and I see it mainly from the economic perspective.

M: Mhm. Thank you very much, is there anything else you want to add, SKFG2_M2?

SKFG2_M2: Hmmm, this was the one thing that made me-

M: OK. Thanks a lot. Ladies?

SKFG2_F4: So, it seems to me like a community of people and states that share the same European continent. They are actually states close to us, so the people living in those states are also closest to us, and as a support for various programmes that try to support the activities of people and goals in those states, especially the economic efficiency.

M: Thank you, SKFG2_F4.

SKFG2_F1: So OLD CONTINENT, EURO and UNION OF STATES.

M: Can you elaborate on the last idea of the union of states? What do you mean by that?

SKFG2_F1: That they are actually states that want to create something together, like create some kind of entity that will help them to help each other economical-security-wise and economically.

M: Mhm, thank you, SKFG2_F1. Does it mean anything to you that you are a European citizen?

SKFG2_F1: Definitely yes.

M: What kind?

SKFG2_F1: For us as- we see it as we can travel. That traveling, we live in such a-

SKFG2_F4: Well not now but.

SKFG2_F1: When there wasn't a pandemic and I feel like we're certainly, compared to other countries in Asia, we're so prosperous here. We live in a much better, better society here.

M: Mhm, thanks a lot. SKFG2_F4, does being a European citizen have any meaning for you?

SKFG2_F4: I see it for example in the development of the cities, like, they look nicer than they did when we were not in the European Union, that basically a lot of things are being fixed up, there are new roads or new park projects or something like that. A lot of activity in that direction.

M: Mhm. SKFG2_M2, do you want to continue?

SKFG2_M2: Like, does it make any difference to me to be a citizen of the European Union? Well, on an individual level, sure, because within the European Union I have a lot of opportunities in terms of employment. The travelling was mentioned and general standard of living within the whole European Union, but- I don't know how to put it, if I were to take it nationally, it doesn't have any meaning for me, because I think that we are all equal, regardless of whether I'm from the European Union or from Asia or from some other part of the world.

M: Okay, thank you very much and do you feel that way?

SKFG2_M2: Yes.

M: Mhm. SKFG2_F3?

SKFG2_F3: I would individually probably do the same as SKFG2_M2. Like those opportunities whether for travel, for employment, for study, for self-fulfilment. And I think, like, for me it's totally that natural that I'm just part of [respondent´s cat occurred in the web camera and the others started to laugh] the European Union, it's just the space where we live. Slovakia is part of the continent of Europe and it's absolutely right that we are, that I can be Slovak and I can be European too.

M: Mhm. Thanks a lot. How would you describe- Question for everybody: how would you describe your overall position, attitude, or feeling towards the European Union? Please elaborate.

SKFG2_F3: May I continue the round. So, for me it's positive, although there are certainly things that can be criticised, as with all communities or all groupings, because nothing is perfect. But in overall I think it's- so I have a positive attitude and (short pause) I don't know if even further {to elaborate}.

M: If you can think of anything else.

SKFG2_F3: If I think of something, I'll say so.

M: Okay, we can continue, SKFG2_M2.

SKFG2_M2: I also have a positive view of the European Union and I think we are on the right path in terms of values, towards that imaginary perfection, which, although it is impossible to achieve, I think we are on the right path. There are some things that can be improved, but that is everywhere.

M: Mhm. What about the ladies?

[00:10:16]

SKFG2_F4: So, it's certainly good to be in such a big community, especially in the position towards the bigger countries like China, India, I don't know, Russia, like, being a small country {she meant that small country as Slovakia cannot compete with bigger countries}. I also see this community positively, but still each country has its own specificity that should be preserved.

M: For example?

SKFG2_F4: For example, something like- it shouldn't come down to speaking only one language, like we should keep our like... languages, for example.

M: Mhm. Thank you. SKFG2_F1?

SKFG2_F1: I also think it's a positive thing for us as a small country that we are in the community and that we are not lost in the community and that we are trying to be, like, a member that has also something to say.

M: Mhm. You get the feeling.

SKFG2_F1: Among so many countries. Yes.

M: If you- If someone were to argue that EU membership is advantageous, beneficial, what advantages would you list?

(long pause)

SKFG2_F4: Well mainly the economic ones, like, mainly those and the security ones maybe too.

M: Thank you, SKFG2_F4.

SKFG2_F4: We, a smaller country, we, basically, have economic benefits from this, especially, so maybe in the future, security benefits as well.

M: Can you elaborate?

(short pause)

SKFG2_F4: Economic? Well, basically we get various grants, various European Union programmes, various funds and so on. That's a big benefit for us.

M: And the security benefits?

SKFG2_F4: Yeah... what do I know, like it's always better to have, like, the protection of everybody that's around us, like, all those states, like, some sort of security, than to be on our own. Maybe, I don't know, I guess.

M: Mhm.

SKFG2_F1: Well, I think so. I think we mainly feel that also in traveling, that it's become easier, by the fact that we've-, those families have-, the children have been married off to other countries, and those visits are not so complicated, so that traveling has become easier. {She meant that cross-country marriages are not problem, they can always come back to home country}. Also, they can also make phone calls, that the Union actually- that phone call is not such a problem anymore.

SKFG2_F4: As complicated as it used to be. [Overlapping with SKFG2_F1]

SKFG2_F1: As it used to be that it was very expensive, now we can call relatives anytime and that has helped us too. The fact that we are in that Union.

SKFG2_F4: Actually, communicate over the internet, or so. Well, it's fine.

M: SKFG2_M2.

SKFG2_M2: I have to agree with SKFG2_F4. I also mostly see the economic benefits, but I like it very much that those economic benefits are more and more conditional on those Member States respecting, in terms of human rights, justice and law, all these- Well, that those institutions {He probably meant institutions within the Member States, such as the Judicatory system in Poland} are simply in line with those human rights and that value orientation also in terms of minorities and their representation, that, if it doesn't work in that state, the European Union will represent them. I am somehow expressing myself badly, I am sorry, I worded it badly, but I am referring mainly to those institutions. And I like the way the European Parliament is (hierarchical?), that every state has its representation there and that representation has some (rules?). The system of work. {He probably like “the system of work” in the European Parliament}

M: Thank you very much. I think you can formulate your thoughts very- that's cool. Don't be nervous about it, normal discussion. SKFG2_F3?

SKFG2_F3: Well, I certainly agree with the previous speakers that many things have been simplified {by entering the EU} and I also have a positive view of that internal control within states. That we simply and easily cannot have what happened in Belarus and also in Ukraine. We are certainly more protected now than Ukraine is. But simply, there is internal control on such things, as SKFG2_M2 mentioned, also on those human rights, also some kind of control in the internal politics, hmmm, control of some kind of internal political situation that could possibly deteriorate somewhere. So, I believe that the European Union is, in a way, also a kind of controller of what is going on in the Member States.

M: Mhm, and you consider that an advantage?

SKFG2_F3: Well, so yeah, unchecked things don't tend to turn out entirely well. In these times when extremism and polarization are actually on the rise, it's probably a pretty good, good mechanism that we have.

M: Mhm, thank you. Some of you have already come across this, that the European Union can be criticised like any other institution or any other association. Which would be the disadvantages? If someone said that EU membership is not beneficial, what disadvantages would you list?

(long pause)

SKFG2_F3: I wouldn't be able to phrase it as it's not beneficial. Like, sure, there are some things that can be criticized. But the overall conclusion is not that it's not beneficial, that I don't see that there are so many things that would be- that would outweigh the scales in a negative setting ( ). I think, even England understood, that it probably wasn't a good idea at all with that Brexit, so- I don't know if they've gained anything by sort of their "freedom”. {She could mean that now, the British have freedom and are not chained by the EU regulations. Also, the “freedom” can be interpreted as a referendum, right to say the opinion}

M: Hmm, okay, so I understand that being in the EU is beneficial and if you could list some of the disadvantages of that?

SKFG2_F3: I won't say disadvantages, but if I were to look at the fact that such- the implementation of a project, for example, in the Erasmus+ framework, the European Union declares the projects should mostly reduce the parity or simply reduce the difference between the West and the East, right, between the old countries and the newly acceded countries. So, those rules are loosely reflected in the projects, for example. That, they simply reflect, I assume, the average wage in each state. That means that if I have a project with 6 organisations from 6 countries, I simply get paid significantly less for the same job in Slovakia than the same person gets in Italy. So, this is not quite fair in my opinion. Although I can understand the setup, that why it's sort of set up that way, but that if I want to talk about reducing the disparity, that would be- It´s a little thing, it's just a little bit so unfair.

[00:20:25]

M: Mhm.

SKFG2_F3: A very specific thing, right?

M: Okay, and that particular thing can be used for some other things too, if I understand correctly.

SKFG2_F3: Yeah, I don't know, I don't really see into the big politics, so I don't know if we have any minor rights within the European Parliament, I guess not. So, it's- the number of members of the parliament is based on the number of people, that's, I think, quite normal within any democratic, democratic set-up. I don't think we have any less power or less weight in those votes there. The fact that we contribute less to the European Union than Germany is probably also understandable, as we have a smaller budget. I don't know if that is reflected anywhere else, I just see it in these projects and it is such that sometimes you think about it that- Because it is the same work, when I look at it from my individual point of view and when I do the budget, I see that I cannot give the same work to an expert in Slovakia as I can give to an expert in Italy or in some other country. So, it seems to me that it is so unfair to those people, because they are doing the same thing.

M: Mhm, thank you very much. We welcome SKFG2_F5 here. Before we bring SKFG2_F5 into the discussion, I'd like to finish this question. What do you see as the disadvantages of EU membership, SKFG2_M2?

SKFG2_M2: I personally do not see any disadvantages, but- Well, yes, I do see some disadvantages, and these are decisions that negatively affect all the citizens of the euro area, the European Union and their members. I would mention, for example, the attempt to adopt nuclear as a form of green energy. Personally, I am rather sceptical and opposed to this proposal. I also do not like the fact that, although I said that, if the European Parliament ( ), where the smaller countries are represented, Germany still figures individually in some decisions, they are not - as if I said that {The last sentence does not make a sense, it´s unfinished sentence}. I will give you an example: when Poland and Hungary vetoed the budget, then Angela Merkel stepped back, it was not some collective vote. So, I would not call it that. {Unclear what he meant by this sentence.} I also do not like the weak controls on the flow of EU funds, because it is public knowledge that EU funds are being tunnelled {financial fraud} all the time, certainly to a greater extent in some countries. So, I would certainly tighten up the controls and I would certainly put the power of prosecution at the state level, or I would certainly improve the impact in some way. So that's about all I can think of.

M: Thank you very much, those are very specific ideas, thank you very much!

SKFG2_F4: So, basically, I agree with SKFG2_F3 who was talking about the wage inequalities, because, really, some of the countries have been in the European Union longer, they were mainly the richer countries and so they had a better starting ground than we did, basically we just ran in and we didn't have the same conditions as everybody else, you know. And basically, what we had was like (short pause) was mainly human resources, there was very cheap labour for many, like, and that's why they built different businesses and factories on our fertile fields, like. Not only on ours, on Czech ones as well, I mean equally so, right? {She meant that it happened in Czechia, too}. And basically, they came here not because they were terribly keen to give us that work, but also because they had very easy or simplified building conditions with us, tax breaks and things like that. The only sad thing about it is that we have people working in such businesses {e.g. construction industry} for pretty miserable salaries, which they probably wouldn't get in those other countries. So, I guess that's what I see, not even that it's a disadvantage, it might improve in the future, and I don't know if it will improve, but... I guess this is such a big disadvantage.

M: Thank you very much, SKFG2_F4. I'll ask SKFG2_F1.

SKFG2_F1: Well, I have the feeling, I guess, with some of these decisions, like now, when they said that these recreation vouchers have to be- That it's not in line with European legislation and we have to- that we have to give the opportunity abroad, but we need to support our own tourism, as other countries do as well. So, actually some of those decisions, so those decisions of the European Union are a little bit detrimental to us or- It was a long time ago when the monopoly of the Slovak Post was abolished, based on the European Union, and it actually gave the opportunity to put the icing on the cake to some- Who was close, created a company and didn't have any buildings... There is no competition, no adequate competition, because the post office is a huge colossus that has large buildings, employs many employees and therefore has large costs. And when that company {private company} that actually takes that retiree that delivers that mail, those costs are minimal and therefore they're taking jobs away from us as a post office. So, it came from the European Union, a regulation like that. And it's my feeling that some of those regulations from the European Union-well, some of them we don't see, but they affect us negatively.

SKFG2_F4: The intention was probably- Excuse me, may I? That the intent was probably to create competition, but basically to create competition in terms that “you guys {meaning private companies} take all the good raisins and such fertile the rest you let to others {meaning post office and government institutions}, you guys {meaning post office and government institutions} worry about the buildings, you worry about the people, you worry about the retirees and I don't know what, you know.” That's not quite fair, so that's it.

M: Thank you, SKFG2_F4, and thank you also to SKFG2_F1 for the answer, very interesting. So! I'm going to ask SKFG2_F5 to turn on her camera as well if possible, and I have another question, and you'll be joining in on that one.

SKFG2_F5: Well, I can't turn on my camera because it's not working.

M: Okay, well, too bad we won't see you, but I'm sure you'll be able to answer. So, I'm going to call on you, it's all the worse for you, unfortunately.

SKFG2_F5: Never mind.

M: Imagine that a natural disaster like a fire, earthquake, flood breaks out in one of the European countries, how should the European Union as an institution behave?

[00:29:57]

SKFG2_F5: So, definitely help.

M: Thank you, SKFG2_F5, and how should it help?

SKFG2_F5: Well, either to send some humanitarian aid or also to contribute financially, like when we had the tornado in the Czech Republic now and so on, so- actually humanitarian aid was sent there, people were sent there to just sort it out somehow.

M: So, the European Union as a whole should come and say, "let's send humanitarian aid."

SKFG2_F5: So, they should agree to send, for example, from some other countries or just somebody who could help there. Like, if it was some big disaster that just the troops of, I don't know, of that country were not enough, then just have some other country come to help. Or I don't know, now with covid, when we were sending the covid tests to other states, or whatever. It is fine when these things work between those European Union states.

M: Thanks a lot, SKFG2_F3, do you want to add something? You can answer.

SKFG2_F3: Yes, yes, right away.

M: Shall I repeat the question?

SKFG2_F3: No. I'm just eating, so I didn't want to drag you into my eating.

M: Let's skip, can SKFG2_M2 answer, then-

SKFG2_F3: No, no, no, I'll tell you, I've only got one. It's cool what SKFG2_F5 said and that for me, for example, the bottom line is that the European Union, by its setting, can be a great coordinator and mediator. I mean the kind of operations centre by that. If something happens somewhere, that centre can say, I don't know, there are some other people around 200 kilometres from here, there are some rescue forces, there are warehouses with material and just be that operations centre {EU}. And that, that's probably not quite happening, and I think that the covid showed a little bit of that. That it was such a pan-European, global issue and that the European Union could have been a little bit more of a coordinator of what the individual states needed, but I understand that nobody has thought about that and that it requires cooperation of the individual states, to make available, like, the information about what's available and where. But I think this would be great if it worked.

M: Thanks a lot. SKFG2_M2, do you want to respond?

SKFG2_M2: I think there is nothing to add to that, also to assess the situation and, as far as possible, to provide adequate assistance in response to the disaster that has struck the country in question and, based on this and previous experience with other disasters, to prepare for future response later on, as natural disasters in particular are going to be with us here more and more.

M: Mhm, I understand, ladies?

SKFG2_F4: So, mainly to coordinate it properly, and basically, first of all, provide that help from the surrounding states, then from the other states, depending on, well, what kind of disaster it's going to be, I guess.

SKFG2_F1: I don't think there's anything to add to that, I think everyone has actually said the essentials.

M: Let me change the question: how should, how should Member States behave?

SKFG2_F4: I don't really understand how if...

M: The question was how the EU should behave in such a situation and do you see any difference if it should be the member states, if it should be not the EU as a whole but the member states of the European Union. Should they behave differently than the European Union?

SKFG2_M2: Well, if they found the aid ineffective, for example, they could call on the European Union to intervene more forcefully or intervene from their own resources if they saw a more effective solution that would at least help solve the situation by a small percentage.

M: Okay, do any of you have any other reaction?

(long pause)

SKFG2_F1: Not really.

M: Not really, ok. Should some member states do more than others in the event of a natural disaster?

SKFG2_F5: Well, each Member State should do what it can, because you can't put it down to one state. Because a state can send more aid, because it has more resources. For example, I don't know, Germany, France, right, which are big states in the European Union, so they would be able to provide more humanitarian and financial aid. And those states that just don't have as much resources, but they also want to contribute, they can also contribute, okay? But they will not contribute as much as the larger states, because they simply can´t.

SKFG2_F4: So, everybody can contribute, for example, sending human resources, well, for example, or by some material resources.

SKFG2_F3: I feel that it's rather the other way around today, that the problem is the other way around, that some countries don't want to as if- That they expect that help, but then already when the help is expected... I think that Slovakia also sometimes behaved like that at the beginning of the covid, that we pretend that it doesn't concern us afterwards. We should probably {help}, let´s say, everyone within our means, but that we shouldn't avoid of that responsibility, that if we get something from the community where we are, we should also contribute in some way. It does not have to be financially, of course, but that solidarity should work both ways.

M: Mhm, thank you. You mentioned that solidarity should work on both sides, is there anything else you want to add to that, can you elaborate on that?

(short pause)

SKFG2_F3: I think, I said that as we receive, we should also give something. We shouldn't just be here for the fact that, that “we've accessed (to the EU?), and now you've promised to level those differences and that means we have no obligations”. Just anything can happen.

M: Ladies, SKFG2_M2, do you want to respond to this question?

SKFG2_M2: I would like to respond. I think that the question whether a state can help more or less is, in my opinion, not really relevant because it always depends on the actual political situation inside that state and especially in the Eastern bloc, where populism and other forms of polarisation of societies are daily matter and it serves for gaining a political capital. I just think (short pause), that no. I don't know, there's no answer I guess to that.

M: SKFG2_F4, SKFG2_F1, any reaction?

SKFG2_F1: I do think that whenever a disaster like this happens, it grabs everyone by the heart, and they immediately send in what forces they can within their means [Overlaps with SKFG2_F1]. For example, when we need to search for the injured, we have dogs for that and therefore those who know how to help will respond immediately and don't even need to be preached to. That they will just go and do it out of their own conviction.

SKFG2_F4: Yeah, I think so too, that basically there's probably not some political- I don't know, well that if, I imagine that disaster would be, like, a huge fire. Well, that now some politicians would say: "well, not going there". {Probably she meant that people would help even if politicians would say that it is not necessary to help}. No, no, I can't imagine that, probably not. I think the aid would be automatic. I don't know [laughing].

M: How should your country - Slovakia - behave?

SKFG2_F4: Sure, I think that Slovakia has such people that they would be very solidary, and they would send everything they have. Well, at least that's what I believe them to be. [laughing] In such some disasters as you named, well, in such disasters.

M: Thank you. Does anyone have any reaction to this?

[00:40:13]

SKFG2_M2: I think that we should do as much as we can, as we did in Greece when the fires were there, to send our firefighters there. That it would be great if we always reacted like that.

M: Thanks.

SKFG2_F3: I think there will be more of a debate here that as long as they are European Union countries, it is sort of okay, but if they are not European Union countries, the debate stops being a bit okay. Right, because it can also involve people from Afghanistan and refugees from Syria, and we behaved very bad in these situations. We argue that we are a Christian country, but this has not been a Christian thing that we have done at all. So, I guess it makes a difference to whom we help and on what occasion we help. Whether it should be the same for every aid? Yes, in my opinion, because it is still humanitarian aid, but whether it is reality, it seems not.

M: Does anyone have a different opinion than SKFG2_F3 here?

SKFG2_F1: No.

M: Hmmm, do you feel responsible to give help personally? SKFG2_F3 says yes.

SKFG2_F4: What kind of help for example? How did you mean, what kind of help?

M: Well, you tell me if you have a responsibility to help in any way.

SKFG2_F3: So, I can say for myself, so that maybe the ladies can imagine. I remember the big collections for the refugees in Traiskirchen, where we were personally, we drove one big car full of stuff from Bystrica {Banská Bystrica city in Slovakia}. And, for example now, I sent some funds to the volunteers who are involved on the Polish border, the Polish-Belarusian border. So, yes, definitely. Also, for example, in our country, the community foundation was doing a collection for the storm, the tornado in Czechia.

SKFG2_F5: Hey, when it comes to the Czech Republic, right now it's like the freshest thing and we were sending our own workers from work, for example. So, I personally wasn't, because it had to be sort of arranged with the shifts and so on, but we were also just sending workers, just to help, just to have some extra hands to be there. Personally, I would definitely help out if I can, like, I don't know, we do things like that. When we have some extra clothes or something, we give it to the homeless shelter and so on, yeah? We just send those things on; we don't throw it away.

M: Thank you, SKFG2_F5. Ladies, SKFG2_M2, do you want to respond to the question?

SKFG2_M2: I think I would feel some personal responsibility, because my surroundings say I'm empathetic, I don't know if that's true, but surely, I do {feel responsibility}. But that I would seek out some voluntary activities in my spare time that help for a good cause, I don't think I do that. I'm more the type that if I'm up to directly confronted with helping someone, I'll do it, as long as it's within my means to do so.

M: Great, thanks a lot.

SKFG2_F4: Yeah, I've helped personally, because we had such a big flood in the city, I think, 11 years ago, and at that time, for example, cleaning products and such-just everything that was needed, some soaps, toilet papers, that was collected and sent to, like, people, because basically quite a large part of the city was flooded. Like, clothes and stuff like that, yeah, certainly {I do it too}.

M: I have one last question here on this topic, and that is: you mentioned, yes, that Slovakia should help and that it has already helped Greece, sent a rescue team or some humanitarian aid, who do you think should pay for this aid?

(short pause)

SKFG2_F1: Good question, but a difficult one.

SKFG2_F4: Well so basically the state that provides it, yes.

M: So, would-

SKFG2_F4: Actually, you were asking about whether the neighbouring states would help, well, yes, the state to the extent that it can, the state that provides it. If the European Union can, they have some funds or whatever, so yes, but if a particular state helps, I guess the state that provides it.

M: Someone else - does everyone see it the same way?

SKFG2_F5: Yeah, I agree with that.

M: Okay, so yeah, if an economic crisis like the 2009 debt crisis happened again and some countries were hit harder than others, what should your country do?

(long pause)

SKFG2_F4: Well, depending on whether we would be more or less affected [laughing]. Like, if we were more, we could ask for some help to be given to us, and vice versa, like, if we could help or we could receive smaller subsidies from the European Union, which I don't think is the case for Slovakia or the Czech Republic. Because we are probably going to be hit very hard by this economic crisis.

M: Thank you, SKFG2_F4. SKFG2_F1?

SKFG2_F1: Can someone else respond? [laughing]

M: Okay. SKFG2_F3, SKFG2_M2, SKFG2_F5, do you want?

SKFG2_F3: I would also be very happy if we could get help, BUT there is one but, and that is that the level of corruption in those countries should be taken into account.

SKFG2_F4: Then we wouldn't get anything [laughing].

SKFG2_F3: And it’s so protectionist, but- Yes, but it is, because actually otherwise those people don't get anything anyway, or they just get crumbs, because it just gets lost somewhere. It's like what SKFG2_M2 said, that the control of the resources that come in under the European funds, that it's just- It's really just, the money comes in, but it doesn't meet the objective or the purpose for which the money came in, so I think that the level of corruption should probably be taken into account, because why should anyone help the fact that it's just going into the pocket of some oligarch or some politician?

M: Thanks, SKFG2_F3.

SKFG2_F3: But how would they implement that, it's very difficult for sure, it's just that the corruption index that we have here in Slovakia is insane and I don't think anybody sane would support an organisation where they know that the money is just going somewhere else, so it's logical, right, isn't it? I wouldn't be surprised if other countries were a bit more reticent about helping countries that have an awful lot of corruption.

M: Including Slovakia?

SKFG2_F3: Yes, I think so.

M: Thank you, SKFG2_F3, I would just like to remind SKFG2_F5 that whenever you start talking and I don't address you, say your name, because when we transcribe it later, so that we know who has spoken. Same question - do SKFG2_M2, SKFG2_F5 want to respond?

SKFG2_M2: I can. So, I think that when there is a crisis, when it comes to the redistribution of resources, nobody can come out of this quasi winner. That is not possible in the European Union within the framework of a unified direction, but as far as the redistribution itself is concerned, I think that everyone should get a share that would somehow stabilise the standard of living in a given country to such an average that everybody, let´s say, would feel the decline equally. And as far as SKFG2_F3 was saying, the corruption index, the distribution of money among the population, that is another matter, I would deal with that as well.

[00:50:50]

M: Would you agree with that?

SKFG2_M2: Yes, definitely.

M: Hello?

SKFG2_F5: Yeah, so I would like to say on that question that it is in the interest of the European Union to remain stable economically, so if there was some big crisis that destabilised the European Union, those countries just financially, then it would have to be redistributed in some way to stabilise it again, because it is in the interest of that European Union that stability is there, yeah? Which needs to be, in those circumstances, sort of maintained. So, if some states have greater financial resources, then simply the greater financial resources are redistributed to the other states so that simply that stability somehow remains balanced there.

M: Thanks for your opinion. Otherwise: if your country is strongly affected negatively, how should other countries react? You may have already, responded to this, do you want to say anything more on this issue?

SKFG2_F1: Once again if you could repeat, I didn't understand the beginning, sorry.

M: If your country is hit hard, how should other member countries behave?

SKFG2_F1: Well, we'd certainly like them to help us. We would certainly like them to help us, just like we helped Greece, we would actually expect that help from other countries as well.

M: Thank you, SKFG2_F1, that's- actually, a similar point has been made here. And now the next question, which is a follow-up to that: If your country has received financial support from other countries, should you be subject to certain conditions, restrictions, rules that come from that?

SKFG2_F5: I think for sure, because for a country to give us money, it's not really a sign of goodwill, but it's just a loan that we actually have to pay back at some point, so there will be some conditions, or there must be some conditions, because every loan has some conditions and some duration, so what we borrow, we will have to pay back at some point afterwards. So certainly, the country can set some of its own conditions, which for us have to be, like, not liquidating, but some that we can meet and both sides can agree on.

(long pause)

M: Does anyone see it differently? Anyone have anything to add?

SKFG2_F4: The way I see it is basically it doesn't have to be just a loan, it can be some sort of grant like some sort of program and basically why shouldn't they give us some sort of conditions that we have to meet, like we have to build some sort of road for it or something like that- We have to have projects or whatever. I think it's okay that they give us some conditions. When they give us money, then they must check it on the some basis, I guess. I guess.

M: Mhm. SKFG2_F1, SKFG2_M2, SKFG2_F3.

SKFG2_F3: I'm like, I think those conditions have to be there, but it's basically waiting for us in the recovery and resilience plan, which is some kind of preparation for a crisis, maybe for us, and it's quite reasonable to expect that we will comply with some conditions. I just think that, that - they're controlling us in some way that we're not going into weird corners.

M: Thanks a lot. SKFG2_F1, SKFG2_M2, any other opinion?

SKFG2_F1: Same.

SKFG2_M2: I agree completely with SKFG2_F3 that as long as aid is fulfilling its purpose, those conditions are absolutely relevant, as long as positive transparency of that country.

M: Okay. I noticed that SKFG2_F1 agreed on that, she had nothing to add.

SKFG2_F1: Yes. Exactly.

M: Great. Consider that there are inequalities between countries, as well as between people within a country. Should the European Union have a common agenda to reduce these social inequalities? Why yes, why not?

(long pause)

SKFG2_F5: So, definitely yes. We can apply it for example to the Roma citizens in our country, when actually Slovakia always pushes them to the margins, whether in work, education and so on or even in living conditions in general, so definitely these differences should be equalised and they should be equalised especially in Slovakia much more than they have been so far, because those people who come from these conditions and are not for example of the same skin colour as we are, so automatically we just take them as something less. For example, if a CV comes with the surname Lakatoš {typical Roma´s surname}, it immediately goes to the bin because the company does not want to employ a Roma citizen. It should start from a very young age, from primary school, so that they all go there compulsorily, so that they simply get to secondary school, so that they then get to university, so that they can also become educated people who can then simply go to work and be full citizens of the Slovak Republic, just like the rest of us. There really shouldn't be those differences, yeah? But unfortunately, there are, because there is still some prejudice, there is still something racist, let´s say, which we just do not like. Like, we don't even give them too many opportunities or chances to get out of the misery where these people are, so they get somewhere up and if they do, it's one percent out of a hundred. So that's it.

M: And this is something that the European Union should address? Should it help to reduce these inequalities?

SKFG2_F5: This should be solved by each state, it should be solved by Slovakia independently, but simply if the state itself cannot solve it or simply does not want to solve it, then in my opinion the euro- the EU should step in, which would set some conditions. If the European Union can simply dictate the conditions that we simply have to, I do not know, to shut down more coal-fired power plants and so on, then it could also simply order to make the equality more equal.

M: Thank you. Hmm, do you all see it similarly, or does anyone have a different opinion with regard to the Roma minority in Slovakia?

(short pause)

[00:59:55]

SKFG2_F3: I don't have a different opinion, I think, the European Union is set up in those terms and conditions. It's a question of how the individual states comply with it, but I think that the conditions, the aid from the European Union was set up to reduce disparities and it hasn't always worked, it doesn't always work, but I think it hasn't worked because - well, it's failed more on the individual states, it's failed more on the individual states. It's not entirely in the European Union {it´s not the EU´s fault, she meant}, because the conditions are set up, the disparities were supposed to be reducing, they were supposed to be levelling out. So far, it has not happened, so I think it is more a case of looking at those individual states, what they have done with that support. And then, there is, I think, the question of human rights, and it is so terribly difficult when one looks at the situation in Poland or the situation in Hungary. Should the European Union demand that human rights are respected? Well, it probably does. Are they being respected? Well, they are not respected and they are not respected in Slovakia. Should we have any sanction for that? Probably yes, but that it is- these are such difficult questions that we are not going to sort it out in a group, a focus group, I guess. [laughing]. Well.

M: I understand. Thank you for your answer. (short pause) I'll repeat the question again: Should the European Union have a common programme to reduce these social inequalities? SKFG2_F4, SKFG2_F1, SKFG2_M2?

SKFG2_F4: So, I think it's very much such a complex problem that has been solved for years, and I think it won't be solved for a long time in our territory, maybe it has started to be solved by some compulsory schooling from the age of five, {probably she meant that inequalities starting to be level by compulsory school for Roma children} so maybe in the future there will be something, but I can't comment on that, or some common program... Maybe, maybe in the education, I guess there could be such a common program.

SKFG2_M2: I think that this is a very complex issue and a very long term issue, because we have so many kinds of inequalities in society, whether it is social inequality, whether it is minorities or whether it is some kind of pay gap, there are just so many things, and there is so much to think about and discuss, and if there was some kind of common agenda that would bring all these aspects together and try to address them somehow at the pan-European level, then it would certainly be a good signal to the world and to the European Union as well.

M: Thank you, I'll be more specific. Anyone have anything to say?

SKFG2_F3: I was thinking, like SKFG2_M2 says, but I think it comes down to the fact that those- that government sometimes, they start to push back against it because it's not just that they set up some common agenda from the European Union, but that it just has to go through the governments of each of those countries, and then that's where we run into it, because a lot of the current governments are nationalistic and they claim that they don't want to have things in common. So, it's a nice idea, but I'm afraid it's not entirely workable in this political set-up. Not that we don't want it. Yeah, I sort of believe that both SKFG2_M2 and I would want it, but someone in the higher positions {politicians} would argue that they don't want it.

M: SKFG2_F3, thank you. I'll make the question more specific, SKFG2_M2 said it's too complex, I agree. Should the European Union have a common system to deal with unemployment in all countries, funded by all member states?

(long pause)

SKFG2_F5: So, the European Union is mainly an open labour market for everybody, so actually everybody can just find a job there if they want to. So, I think that the European Union is kind of open in this case, for example, we have here - we have new car factories opening all the time, we have some new places just where people can work and so on, so I think the European Union is doing the best it can for that. The question is simply whether or not those people want to work. The unemployment fluctuates on that factor as well, that just when a person says, hmm, I don't want to go to work there, I'd rather stay out of work, so it is no going to be solved, right?

M: Mhm. What about the others, how do they see it?

SKFG2_M2: I don't have the data to see how many people in the European Union are unemployed voluntarily, but as far as the open labour market across the European Union, where people would be forced to migrate for work, I don't think that's possible either, because there are an awful lot of people who just can't afford to travel, they have some commitments or some other constraint. And as far as unemployment as such is concerned, we've got a market economy here. Most businesses, or almost all businesses, are privately owned, so I think it could be addressed by some subsidies to businesses, or some investment for crisis areas where unemployment is low, where the standard of living is lower. I think that - this is a concrete solution, but I think that, yes, the European Union should tackle unemployment within those Member States.

SKFG2_F1: I would- it also seems to me that in Slovakia it's terrible ( ) Older people, over 50 are taken as older, and they are not employable for companies because they are not interesting for them and yet they have experience, they have older children and it's there ( ). And even when unemployment is low, like it was a few years ago, those people over 50 still had a problem to get a job, so how is that a problem there ( ). Well, even here {she meant age} it's actually a kind of unfairness. So, I know that even the Union, I don't know if they would, how they could address it, but that's the injustice in our country.

M: Thank you, thank you. SKFG2_F4, do you have anything to add?

SKFG2_F4: So, I think the Union could address this by encouraging some work activities directly in those countries, directly in some cities, because it's ( ). Yes, it's a free labour market and you can really get a job wherever you want, you can go to Germany, you can go to Austria, you can go to Poland... But when you have a family house here, two kids, like, I don't know if you're that happy to go, like, and you're going to be there one month, and then go back again. Yes, they go anyway, they are babysitters or such, but I don't think this is the solution. Travelling within the European market, yes, for young people it's definitely- priceless experience they get there for sure. But once you're, you have a family and you lose the job, for example, in Slovakia or even in the Czech Republic, it's very difficult to get a job near your home, or even somewhere close to your home, or somewhere close to the nearest distance, somewhere in the nearest county or something. It is very difficult indeed, and the Union could only address this with some specific subsidies, but I cannot imagine it, I do not know exactly how it should be.

(short pause)

[01:10:05]

M: If there was high unemployment in a country- SKFG2_F3, you were going to say something. You are, you're muted.

SKFG2_F3: Yes, yes, that's basically what the European Union is doing, by supporting job creation, I don't think it would make sense to have like one central employment office. It probably wouldn't work, like the ladies were saying, SKFG2_M2 was saying, that it's probably not entirely realistic. And there is support for job creation and for industry and for science and research. We are getting back to the control; the support is there and how that support is used is up to the individual states. The fact that it is not working here is probably more of a problem for us. I will go back completely to the one point I made at the beginning, that the European Union could, first of all, standardise those labour costs within its projects. That would be a great way to start, that if we want to level out those inequalities, then we need to start, I think, in those sources plus in those rules that the European Union applies for its money for specific projects where that inequality is completely on paper. Yeah, you look at the handbook and you see that there is that inequality. So, I guess the first super step would be this one and then we can talk further about unemployment, and I don't think it's realistic to send somebody to work… Support for those underdeveloped regions as it is; it is fine. The issue is control.

M: Thank you very much. That's very interesting, it helps us a lot these your feelings and opinions. I have one more question about unemployment: Should your country contribute to reducing unemployment in another EU country, even if it would mean additional costs for your country {Slovakia}?

SKFG2_F3: Well, if we are one community, then yes, I guess, but I think that would require some kind of joint action, but not a joint action in the form of a joint labour office, but maybe some kind of document that everybody would commit to. Let´s say, a methodology on how to reduce unemployment, maybe some sort of sensible priorities for Europe, to analyse which of those locations are suitable for what, so that it doesn't happen, as the girls also said, that simply fertile land where agriculture can be supported and it will be used for the built-up area of a factory that could be happily somewhere else, where it wouldn't take that fertile land. So, I think this could work, I think it would certainly be great to try it, I don't know.

M: Mhm. What about the others? Do you think that Slovakia should support another Member State, even though it would mean additional costs for Slovakia? In unemployment. SKFG2_F4, you started talking.

SKFG2_F4: [laughter] I don't think so, because we are a small country and basically, we don't even have {sources} for ourselves. There are bigger and richer countries that could do it, I think.

M: Mhm, for example?

SKFG2_F4: Well, Germany, France, for example.

SKFG2_F1: I also think that first of all we have to- that we, ourselves, have big problems to help someone else to solve ( ), when we ourselves don't quite know how ( ) We don't have enough of our own job opportunities and we don't have enough for the lower class, and for the Roma people mentioned and those who are less educated/have no education, so we don't actually have enough jobs and enough projects for them, so we cannot help someone else.

M: What about SKFG2_M2 and SKFG2_F5?

SKFG2_F5: Well, I would like to say that the same thing is true with the tornadoes and so on. If a state simply needs help, then we have to help that state in some way if we expect that state to help us in some sort of our worst moment. Where is the solidarity then when we say, “Well, you help us, but we will not help you, because we simply, simply will not help you?” Yeah? That's the same as with that humanitarian aid, it's the same as with the tornado, with the earthquake and so on. If we want to declare to be a state of solidarity, then we should be solidarity in this as well and help another state even just with the little that we have, right? Nobody is saying that we have to help as much as, let´s say, Germany or France, right? But if - Every country should help with an amount that is not simply liquidating for them, right? So, that´s it, and it's about unemployment, it's about famine, it's about any kind of disease, it's about everything.

M: Thank you, SKFG2_F5. SKFG2_M2?

SKFG2_M2: I would like to ask that what would that unemployment look like in that state, that- would the standard of living there deteriorate extremely or would it just jump to some lower percentage? Or what should I imagine under it?

M: Let's say the unemployment would be worse than in Slovakia.

SKFG2_M2: Well, in that case, individually {by state} only in the form of an investment or a loan and collectively within the European Union. But I think if it was an investment or a loan, it might be worth the deficit. ( )

M: Thank you. Thank you very much. Hmmm. That was kind of the first disagreement, that's not a problem at all, that's exactly what we want to find out what the areas of disagreement are, so that's absolutely fine and thank you for that. Thank you for your views. We're coming to the end. However, I have couple of closing questions. We have touched on a few different areas today, such as social and economic differences, are there any other areas that you would say are relevant when we talk about relations and mutual support within the European Union?

SKFG2_F3: I would say that science and research and human rights, or if you extend it to human rights, then the fight against extremism and radicalisation, the fight against terrorism is such a common thing, and then of course the geopolitical things, or defence. But I don't understand that much about those, but I think this should be some kind of common approach. It is happening to some extent, it's just-

M: -You would also support the European Union playing a bigger role in human rights.

SKFG2_F3: I don't know if the question is that education, I can't imagine that but in any case, it would help Slovakia if it (worked?) a little bit on its education.

M: Mhm, thank you. SKFG2_F4, SKFG2_F1, are there any topics that are important to you that we haven't talked about?

[01:19:49]

(long pause)

SKFG2_F5: For example, I haven't been here for the whole thing, but for example, security, military, something regarding that, there would certainly be more- We have Ukraine and so on, very close, so it's just starting to boil over in a way, so we would need some just better military, some equipment or defences to be able to better defend those borders and so on. So, there should certainly be investment in that security as well, as well as in terms of refugees and issues like that.

M: Refugees and similar issues, can you elaborate on that please?

SKFG2_F5: Hmm, I guess I don't know what I meant anymore. I wanted to say that it's actually about the security, it's just about how to handle even those refugees who actually cross our borders and so on, so that everything goes safely, so that there are no conflicts and soon.

M: Mhm, SKFG2_F3 wants to respond.

SKFG2_F3: Yes, I have forgotten one very important thing where the European Union should tackle things together, and that is the climate crisis. Unfortunately, we cannot do this alone, it will have to be coordinated by such a wider community and it is very important, it is urgent. And we have talked a lot about these economic things, inequalities, but I think that this is going to be a problem that will then, as it were, result in those economic inequalities, and unemployment, and refugees, and all sorts of other things.

M: Mhm, thanks a lot. SKFG2_M2, SKFG2_F4, SKFG2_F1?

SKFG2_F4: The environment as she said now for example, the climate crisis for sure, like, science and research, health, like, and education, certainly.

SKFG2_F1: Everything has been said.

SKFG2_M2: I also think that especially education and to take it to a different level, I would say to modernize it, because the society is quite polarized, and it seems to me that it can only be solved by education, and it is important to educate especially the young generation and in modern ways. So that would be my main focus.

M: How would you say that the topics discussed, both the ones you mentioned and the ones we talked about for the previous hour and a half, are related to the future of your country in the EU?

(long pause)

SKFG2_F3: I personally didn't understand the question.

M: How and if these topics we discussed today are related to the future of Slovakia and its membership in the European Union?

(short pause)

SKFG2_F4: Every area is related, isn't it? Somehow. That's such a general question.

SKFG2_F1: [laughter] Yes, very much.

M: Okay.

SKFG2_F4: We can't conceive it.

M: Mhm, we can- Yes, SKFG2_F5, go ahead.

SKFG2_F5: So, I think that especially as the future of us in the European Union is based on the fact that people should have more insight into politics and what's really sort of going on around us, in the European Union and so on. So that they have not wrong information, so that they are not misinformed, so it's also related to education, which would be good to have good education in the political sphere as well for all ages and all people, because then if people are not educated, if they don't know about these things, the real issues and so on, then disinformation arises, which actually leads to people wanting to leave the European Union and so on, which would just be one of the worst possibilities that could exist for our country, because if we left the European Union, we would end up like Ukraine or other countries like that, and we wouldn't have the protection of the West and we would be, like, pretty bad off.

M: If nobody wants to respond any more- (short pause) Then I have one last question: What would you say in conclusion to this topic? I'm asking each of you for a final comment, a feeling, an assessment.

(long pause)

SKFG2_M2: Shall we evaluate this discussion or-

M: -Yes, some final remarks, what would you say in conclusion.

SKFG2_M2: I think it was a great discussion with a variety of people, we're all different, we all have different opinions, and it was an interesting, interesting experience for me.

M: Okay.

(short pause)

SKFG2_F3: It would be great if such discussions were also held in less pro-European groups, so that people could hear that, why someone has a problem being European and someone has no problem being European. We are a sort of homogeneous group here, it could be more interesting, if somebody would be like- {she argued that it would be nice to have somebody with different point of view}. Well, maybe it's nice, as SKFG2_M2 was saying, to actually go to schools with these discussions, that those young people would be forced to think and discuss and argue what does it mean to be part of the European Union, to be a European and what would it mean to be just a Slovak and a Slovak woman.

M: Mhm, thank you very much.

SKFG2_F5: So, I would also like to respond to what SKFG2_F3 said. What have I meant to say? Well, such discussion should be for the wider public, but especially as SKFG2_F3 said, that it should be for those groups that actually should be forced into that discussion in some way. But unfortunately, you can't force those people into a discussion and especially those people. People who know the least about these things will refuse to talk to you or discuss these things, so that's why we keep coming back to this education issue, where we actually need to try to reach at least as wide a spectrum as possible, so that the education is much greater. As I think this debate has been good in its own right, but we have not had anybody here who has been adversarial to the rest of us. But let's just face it, it is terribly hard to find those people because those people will not debate. And I think those questions were well asked, I think- I hope the project comes out okay, I hope that just that work will be worth it in the end and I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

M: Thank you very much.

SKFG2_F4: So, it was an enjoyable discussion, I'm sure every area we discussed will affect our state and every citizen in the future as well. And such discussions could be televised on TV instead of commercials, for example. I guess that's it, thank you.

[laughter all around]

M: I'll write that down.

SKFG2_F1: Well, I also thought it was interesting to learn about other areas, some of which I don't know about, so it was actually a fruitful discussion and I enjoyed it.

M: Well, I'm glad it didn't cause any inconvenience to any of you, if you have nothing more to add to the debate, the discussion, the questions, the EU topic, I stop the recording.