M: Well, we can start by maybe doing a round of introductions. Just your name, what you do, and anything else you want to comment on. Maybe we can start on this side [looking at the participant on it’s right].

ESFG1_M1: Okay. I'm ESFG1_M1, I'm 26 years old, I'm a software developer or programmer, here in Madrid, in a multinational and (short silence), I don't know, shall I explain something else?

M: Whatever you want.

ESFG1_M1: Well, I'll go with that for now.

ESFG1_M2: Okay, I'm ESFG1_M2, I'm 34 years old, I'm studying {a PhD} at the <name of university>, and I have a lot of small jobs that I do: {teaching at a} school, editing and things like that.

ESFG1_F3: I am ESFG1_F3, I am 55 years old, I am a consultant and teacher of adult issues, people consulting.

ESFG1_F4: I am ESFG1_F4, I am 44 and I am a civil servant. I just changed jobs so right now I don't know exactly what I do [laughs].

ESFG1_F5: Hello, I am ESFG1_F5, I am 38 years old, I studied law and now I am working in a German pharmaceutical company. I am in the chemical part and in matters of public tenders, bids. I lived 6 years in Germany, and that also helped me to get the job in this pharmaceutical company.

ESFG1_M6: I am ESFG1_M6, I am a professor at the university in the field of health. And well, everything I know about the European Union is out of interest, general culture. I am not informed nor do I have complete knowledge on the subject, but that's what we are here for, right?

M: Yes, great.

MA: Even better [laughs].

M: Okay, so the first question I would like to ask you is if you can write on the paper you have, I don't know if anyone is missing one? [noises passing papers] Well, if on the paper you have you could write three ideas that come to your mind when you hear the word European Union. You don't have to think about it too much. Just off the top of your head, whatever comes to your mind.

(long pause)

M: Well, let's do a round to find out what the other participants have said.

ESFG1_M1: Well, I put: economy, refugees and parliament.

ESFG1_M2: I put: modernity, economy and colonialism.

ESFG1_F3: Me: geopolitics, aid (OL: ayudas) and war in Ukraine.

ESFG1_F4: I have put: economy, history and ease of travel.

ESFG1_F5: I put: Member States, Euro and single market.

ESFG1_M6: I put: unity among countries, single currency and stability.

M: Okay. Stability in what sense do you mean?

ESFG1_M6: Let's say that a country, on its own, will have more difficulties to achieve any kind of, for example, at the commercial level. That the union of all the countries, in the way of the United States, a union of States, as a larger State than... one plus one does not equal two, it equals three.

M: Great

MA: Someone said "ease of travel".

M: Yes, ESFG1_F4 said so, right?

ESFG1_F4: Yes, I said so.

M: Have you done Erasmus or any kind of these plans?

ESFG1_F4: Because of my age, {no}... But the truth is that I wasn't thinking about that in particular, but that you can move around easily, without having to think about passports, and so. You take the train, the car, whatever, and you go from one place to another and that's it.

M: To others, does this also seem to be the case, that the European Union represents ease of travel?

[Many participants]: Yes (overlapping)

ESFG1_F3: Absolutely.

ESFG1_F5: In fact, I made a trip to Europe in 1998 and I remember what it was like to change the currencies of each country. So I say "nowadays, what an advantage it is that with the Euro you can travel, how easy it is". So, well, we have this union in many countries, but it has made it much easier. The barriers have fallen and we have a single currency, so it's better.

M: You also mentioned the Euro, didn't you? [addressing ESFG1_M6]

ESFG1_M6: Yes, I think that the single currency, since we are in the Euro, effectively, the change of currency is not necessary. There are no borders at the labor level either, I have also worked in France. It has been much easier being within the European Union. Although, as a negative aspect, I think that since we have the Euro it is as if we had been cheated, because everything is more expensive, everything goes up except salaries. So, I think that entering the Euro, at an economic level, for the workers, has harmed us, more than benefited us.

ESFG1_M1: [addressing ESFG1_M6] Sorry, by more expensive you mean- (overlapping)

ESFG1_M6: -Compared to pesetas. I am from the pesetas {times} [laughs]. It's just that you are younger, but I see a lot of difference in the (Grocery shopping? OL: despensa? / pantry?) that it affords. Especially when you compare the increase in the cost of things with the increase in salaries, right?

M: And do the rest think the same? Or, have you heard this is a thing that is said?

ESFG1_F3: I experienced it when we were in the organization transferring all the products in pesetas to Euros, and everybody was very calm because there seemed to be a lot of conversations in which it was insisted that the price of things was not going to change. That, if it was going to occur to someone, in his business, to make money by changing pesetas to Euros, that "poor him, {he don’t know} what is going to happen to him". But then the reality is that where it was one Euro... sorry, one hundred pesetas, it became one Euro, when, to say it in a rough way,- (overlapping)

ESFG1_M6: -Which is 166 {pesetas}-.

ESFG1_F3: -I have the same. Here is the income statement in '95 ( ) those of now, and the cost of living {trying to illustrate inventory changes or something similar}. I have that same feeling, of course.

ESFG1_F4: I remember when it changed, and I do remember that it was in the news, in the television news, in January, because I think it was for the year (change of year?) or so. I remember something like that, and it was in the news: "No, it has not changed {prices}, because coffee used to cost you I don't know how much in pesetas and now it costs you I don't know how much in Euros". And I think it is true that it was contained there for a few months at the beginning, but a year later everything had... we had lost purchasing power with the change to the Euro, because everything went up. And I remember that there was also another year that... I don't remember if it was so often, but there was a change in the products: it cost the same but the packaging was smaller, or the packaging was the same but inside there was less product. So, I think that all that was like a game so that in the end what everybody expected to happen would happen.

M: Do you think there was already an expectation that it was going to happen?

ESFG1_F4: I think so. On TV they denied it, but I think people saw it coming and it happened.

ESFG1_M6: I think that (in line?) with the "stability" that I had put within these words {referring to his list of words related to the European Union}, one of the reasons for joining the European Union is to achieve a certain equality among all countries in terms of salaries, taxes, cost of living. And the countries that were, let us say, worse off than others, have to make a greater effort, and perhaps in that sense it has harmed us. By trying to put us on a par with them, it turns out that we have to pay for it with a price increase so that it costs us more.

ESFG1_M1: Well, but we also receive a lot of aid, I guess. I mean, more than the countries that are better off. So, in a certain sense, it is compensated a little bit and it is worthwhile, I understand, this unity, to level up-

ESFG1_M6: -Yes ( ), it seems that when Spain joined the European Union it was a recipient country of huge amounts of money, and since some years ago, I don't know how many, we became a donor country.

M: When you [addressing ESFG1_M6] meant "they", who did you mean?

ESFG1_M6: To what?

M: When you were saying that prices were going up in Spain so that “they” would-

ESFG1_M6: -Yes, to other countries ( ) with labor level, or to pay taxes. I imagine that if a balance is sought among all, those of us who were paying less than other countries have to pay more to reach that level. Although the thing is that salaries should also be equalized, but well.

M: And roughly which countries are you thinking of?

ESFG1_M6: I don't know, but Germany is a strong country, France too. I know France, and in France the minimum wage, the least you can earn in any job, is about 1,700 euros, and here we have 900 by a miracle, because a few months ago it was 700 euros.

ESFG1_F5: I agree with that, because in the end it is true that in Spain in particular the brain drain happened. We couldn't find work here, and the people who could went abroad to find a job. And then it is true that the difference in salaries is big. Here in Spain, where the cost of living is not particularly cheap, salaries are lower than, perhaps, in Germany. And at the same level of studies and so on, in Germany you could earn much more. And well, in the end people who can't change {job} or are unemployed for a while, or afterwards it's also frustrating. But, it is also an advantage of being in the European Union that we can move and look for work in another country.

[00:11:07]

ESFG1_F3: I think we are very much in the middle of everything. As far as salaries are concerned, I know that there are minimum salaries of 1,700, 1,800; 2,000 I think Luxembourg has. But if you then look at Albania, or you look at Greece-

ESFG1_M6: -Portugal-

ESFG1_F3: -Look at the Eastern countries, or the Portuguese, they have a pyrrhic salary. I think we are very much in the middle. That's my feeling.

ESFG1_F4: I think that in the end the image we have of ourselves as a country in the labor field is not only the salaries, which in the end are not high, but it is true that in Eastern Europe that has been incorporated ( ). But I think that in the end the problem is unemployment. Because the levels of unemployment here are not the same as in other European countries which have a lower GDP than ours and lower salaries than ours, but people have more work than here.

ESFG1_M1: What unemployment {rate} do we have now? Excuse me, if you know approximately [addressing the rest of participants]?

ESFG1_F3: Thirteen with three {13.3%} seems to me it has been today in the latest EPA.

ESFG1_F4: But we have always had it very high (even?) when we have not had a crisis. I remember when the PP used to say "the Spanish economy is like this, up, up, up", and the unemployment rate was still very high.

M: Okay. And other people had mentioned "economy" as well, as in general. Are you more or less referring to this, to the Euro? Or what other ideas did you have when you have mentioned economy?

ESFG1_M1: Well, nothing particular, from my side. But it does seem to me that it is one of the main reasons why it is convenient to be, just as he said [referring to ESFG1_M6]: it is not the same for a single country, such as Spain or even Germany, even if it is one of the powerful ones. If you are alone, you do not have the same negotiating power or... yes, well, negotiating power, as if you have the whole European Union. And that is why you can put yourself on a par with the United States, with Russia, with China, with countries that are much bigger.

ESFG1_M6: Perhaps the most benefited are the companies, which can market in a much easier way, without the need to change currencies. Also at the level of establishing themselves in a country, of setting up a factory in the Eastern countries, where many automobile or other types of companies create their companies to be able to sell their vehicles in all... in Spain or wherever. Perhaps it is the companies that benefit the most from this union.

ESFG1_F5: Yes, the issue you were just talking about, about aid and so on, I think that in the end it is like, being part of the European Union, there are Member States that, depending on their situation, have received more at the beginning, such as the case of Spain, but now they are in a situation where they can give more. So in the end it is like they win, because you give, but you receive. And another (point that is?) better with the union is that each country has its strong point, let's say. Well, maybe Spain was more based on tourism and so on, and maybe Germany was more based on R+D. In other words, each one is a group of very complex states, and each one has its strengths and weaknesses. So, this also makes it easier to provide aid, right? That is to say, well, in this weaker point it is good to move within a varied group.

M: What do the rest of you think about what ESFG1_F5 said, that Spain used to receive more and that now it can be in a position to give? Do you think this is so?

ESFG1_F3: Regarding aids?

M: With respect to aids and in general.

ESFG1_F3: When COVID has passed, what I have heard the most is that we have money coming in.

ESFG1_M6: Yes, that is, we received help. But apparently there are some countries that when they join do not have to donate, let's say, a quota, and the rest do. And these countries are recipients of aid, and then they stop receiving that aid and start paying that quota, regardless of the fact that when they receive that aid it is for agriculture, or for COVID, or for whatever. But I think they are different things.

M: But do you think it works more or less like that, that some countries at one time receive, or used to receive, and later at some point they start to contribute more to the European Union?

ESFG1_F3: If someone receives, someone gives.

ESFG1_M6: I understand that this is so. It's not that I believe it, it's just that it's what I've heard at some point.

ESFG1_M2: I also think it is important to consider that all this aid is linked to the implementation of certain policies in these countries, in line with what the European Union also wants. So, of course, a series of loans are coming, but Spain has to organize its economy in such a way that it complies with what the European Union is demanding. So, on the one hand you have there something that could be a loss of autonomy of certain States, but you also have an order that allows integrating all of them and trying to unite them in that sense.

M: Okay yes, then I'm going to come back to this topic.

MA: And has anyone perhaps thought about what this idea of Europe means to each of you, perhaps? Does it come to anyone's mind?

ESFG1_M1: How, at the individual level?

MA: Yes, apart from the three ideas we have said, maybe something related to identity?

ESFG1_F5: I think that a European identity as such, maybe it is difficult, because in the end you are more of a national feeling. And I say it, that I have lived abroad and I have not felt European, I have felt Spanish. “Do you feel proud to be part of the European Union?” Yes, but I associate it with my nationality, I don't have a European feeling.

M: The rest, does it mean anything to you to be a citizen of the European Union? Because in practice, being Spanish, you also have European citizenship.

ESFG1_M6: Maybe outside Europe yes. Maybe you go to the United States and say you are from Europe, and the concept is more {positioned} than if you say that you are from Spain, which maybe they will think you are from Latin America. You are European. That concept outside of Europe might make more sense. But I agree with her [referring to ESFG1_M5] that if I go to France I am a foreigner, a migrant, and they are going to treat me like... well, I have experienced some racism there, the same as other people in Spain might feel.

ESFG1_M1: Yes, not only that, but I don't feel particularly European, as an idea of nationality or belonging.

ESFG1_F4: I do a little bit, yes. It is true that I don't have... that is, that my identity... if someone asks me "where are you from?" I will say "Spanish", I don't say "I am European", even if I am abroad, or if I were outside Europe I would say that I am from a specific country. But I do notice differences, which I think are due to living in Europe. Differences such as… I don't know. Because if you travel to North Africa, the culture changes a lot. If you go to Asia as well. Even if you go to the United States, well, I think there are cultural things, with an American person, from the United States, that are different. Maybe in things, I don't know, silly things... things like if you copy or not copy in an exam, which here is... I don't know. Or things like the relationship with nudity or sexuality, I think there are things that are... that I think I have because I live in Spain, but because Spain is in Europe. If Spain were in another continent they might be different.

ESFG1_F3: For me it is not contradictory. I think it is very complementary. I feel very Madrilenian, very Spanish, and I love being able to think that I feel European and that I am part of the idea of Europe. I like that very, very much. As it is not contradictory to say that you are a daughter and you are a sister, too; or you are a niece and you are an aunt. And in that line, there are many things of the day to day in which I would like, even more, that there was a certain Europeanism of... well, towards the north, in something more of our customs, without removing many, but... I don't know, for example, the handling of black money and all those things horrify me as a Spaniard and I love to think that someday they can change because there is someone who is pushing, and that is Europe, for example.

M: Yes, ESFG1_M6

[00:20:00]

ESFG1_M6: I remember, not long ago, that we, in the environment in which I have moved during these years, I have heard people talking about Europe excluding Spain. They say "because in Europe..." and I was amused, and since then I point it out and say: "the rest of Europe, you mean, because Spain is also Europe". I get the feeling that many people speak of Europe as excluding Spain, without being aware that we are also part of Europe. As it is a peninsula, or for some reason, we talk about Europe as if it were something foreign. But it is something unconscious, everybody knows that Spain is in Europe, but nevertheless they speak of Europe as they would speak, or as we speak of Spain being in the islands. And the islanders say: "this is also Spain", and they talk to them about "the peninsula". Well, something like that.

ESFG1_M2: Do you think it has...? Sorry, I don't know if I can ask [referring to ESFG1_M6] [addressing the moderator]?

M: Yes, yes, go ahead.

ESFG1_M2: Do you think it has to do, when you were talking about the islands, with the position in which you place yourself in relation to whom you may be comparing yourself with? Because of course, you are Europe, but just a few minutes ago you recognized Spain as a weak state within the European Union, which still receives aid. So, when you compare yourself with others, you tend to see yourself in a position of "I am the one who needs to be helped", as could be the situation of the islands, for example, with respect to Spain directly, right?

ESFG1_M6: The feeling I have had is that there are people, including myself at a given moment, who talk about Europe as if it were something in which we are not included, until someone says to you: "you mean the rest of Europe, because Spain is also Europe", and then you say: "that's true, I forgot it". It is part of that sense of belonging.

ESFG1_M2: Likewise, I don't know, I think it may also have to do with... for example, several of you were born in Spain and later became Europe. Well, the European Union was formed and ( ). On the other hand, there are other people, much younger, who have grown up as Europeans, so to speak. I, most of the people with whom I share, Europeans here of, I don't know, 25 or 26 years old, I don't know anyone who doesn't feel like "I am Europe, I am one more", right? Well, that on the one hand. And then, before, when you mentioned [addressing the moderator] "how does it feel to be European?" In my particular case, I am Peruvian, but I have been here in Spain for many years, and in fact I have spent three years as a Peruvian, studying, enrolled in the university and studying, with my rights curtailed because I was not a community citizen, and even though I was studying I could not work, because I was not allowed, and a series of things, and I was lucky that I have a grandfather who migrated from Italy to Peru and actually, thanks to him, that my contact with Italy was zero, beyond the fact that I like pasta [laughs] and that thanks to him, seventy years later, that grandfather ends up saving my situation. And of course, I got a European passport and out of nowhere I got a whole series of rights that I now have. And I think that sometimes you think that this idea I had of Europe was associated with freedom, with respecting the rights of all, but when you come here and you feel that the situation in which some people find themselves is completely unfair, despite the fact that, for example, I had been working all that time, I still spend and pay taxes on the products I buy, but nevertheless I am cut back for something that does not seem as relevant to me as the fact that you were born there.

ESFG1_M6: Yes, I know that too. Not in my case, but in other people who have told me about similar situations, which are very unfair. Yes. To come here to study, to have a job, and suddenly they tell you "look, no, you have to leave because you are not European and you have to go".

M: Okay, now I am going to change the question a little bit and I am going to pose you a scenario, to see what expectations you would have regarding Europe in a specific scenario. So, imagine for a moment that there is a major natural disaster, an earthquake, a flood, a plague or forest fires, in a country of the European Union that is not Spain. How do you think the European Union, the European institutions, should act in such a scenario?

ESFG1_F3: Only in one country, you don't separate the others?

M: Yes, in a specific country, any country.

ESFG1_F5: I don't know if at the European level there are specific funds to deal with natural disasters, I don't know. But if there were, I suppose it is like a piggy bank to which all the States have contributed and from there it would be used to help a State in crisis.

M: And if there wasn't, do you think there should be such a mechanism?

ESFG1_F5: It would be fairer. Because in the end it is something that can happen, it is very common that it can happen, something natural. So it would be good to have that fund in which everyone contributes.

ESFG1_M6: I believe that it is even an obligation, as a member of the European Union, in the event that one of your members of the Union has a problem, everyone would have to help out to a certain extent. It should be included in the conditions of membership of the European Union.

(long pause)

MA: And how should Spain act if this were to happen in a place other than Spain?

ESFG1_M6: Well, proportionally... that is, everyone would have to contribute an amount of money, which would have to be agreed upon, proportionally to their GDP, to their income.

ESFG1_F3: ( ) resources, right? With knowledge. Well, if it is a fire, who knows about drones to drop water for the fire? ( ) to go, wherever. Not to speak only of money. Because of all that traffic there is of people going from one place to another, lending a hand, just with this, with the head. Also with the purse, I think, huh? [laughs]

ESFG1_M6: I believe that there should be money, funds foreseen for this type of emergencies that are also obtained with the contributions of each country.

M: In other words, you don't think that each country would have to deal with this type of situation on its own, but that the European Union as a whole should have mechanisms to act in this type of scenario, right?

ESFG1_M1: Well, if it is serious enough.

ESFG1_M6: Of course, it will depend on the practicality of the problem as well.

ESFG1_F3: Yes, I do not believe that the European Union should replace the mechanisms in place in each country. But one thing is to have a small fire and that's all, and another thing is that half the country is burning or that there are tremendous floods, or maybe, I don't know, like the volcano in La Palma, which are rare and serious things... well, now they are going to be less and less rare, but serious. I think it would be good if there were other mechanisms that were not national, that were European, and that could be complementary in these situations. What happens is that I believe that… I think that with the funds coming from the European Union, which I believe that Spain has been a recipient and now we are going to receive another large amount, I believe that it benefits a lot, but I have the feeling that the money arrives and the actions are then carried out wherever they are carried out, either by a town council, an autonomous community, the Spanish Government, depending on the (level?) it may be. But obviously I believe that at a political level there is not much interest in making it known that this money, that this action is financed by Europe, because it is much better that the local government that is, or the party that is governing a town hall builds a sports center or fixes the roads... well, yes, it will come to you, as I remember it came to you, the posters of the works and so on, that is... but you had to pay attention, because if it was not on the poster that was in front of the work, nobody would say "the European Union is going to give us this much money to fix all the roads". Nobody says that. So, I think that, with the funds, I really believe that Spain... then there will be those that have been used well and those used badly, as in everything, and there is mischief everywhere, and here we have enough of it, I think. But beyond that, I believe that those {funds} that have been used well, it is not said much that it is European Union money. Now it is, because we are negotiating with Europe and ( ). But once it comes in and things start to be executed, well, I think it will be put in the papers where it has to be put, and that's it. Better if it looks like it's all yours.

MA: And if a country had to pay more, for example, who would it be? If it had to.

(short pause)

ESFG1_M2: Germany [laughs].

M: Can you repeat that, please? [laughter]

ESFG1_M2: [laughs] No, Germany. I would imagine that, as several people here were mentioning, it would have to be proportional contributions, and I think Germany is the most important economy, and France, in the European Union. Is the one who kind of drives the policy.

ESFG1_M6: Absolutely.

M: But I would ask you in another way. If there were to be a common fund to take care of this type of situation in the European Union, how do you think the distribution of responsibilities or contributions to this fund should be? Based on what criteria? There could be many ways of doing it, right?

ESFG1_M2: From the same economy, proportional, I guess. That is, according to the GDP, according to the investments that are being made, the balance... I don't know what the exact name is called, the income and expenditure. But a little bit according to that and proportionally.

M: The rest?

ESFG1_F5: Yes, I think it is fair. Just as it would be fairer to say that countries that are weaker economically may not contribute as much. Logical. In the end it is the same as in income, one pays more taxes the higher the income one has. So it is the same for the Member States: the one that can contribute more at that moment, at that moment... I imagine that they will adjust, I do not know. But it is fairer that whoever can contribute more should contribute more.

[00:30:13]

ESFG1_F3: I think so too, but it has always been very complex for us to end up with a (division?) or something like that. Because I have met a lot of people who on purpose do not want to have it so they don't have to (contribute?) because it is easier to extend their hand {to ask for money}. It is not a thing that comes, that is so, that is not known. Well, I know a lot of people, a lot of people. There are certain cultures, certain places, where it is much easier to ask for help, for a subsidy, for unemployment, than to start working. For me it is very common to see jobs in which the salary is short, they say "no, I don't work, I don't want to work, it is better for me to collect unemployment benefits". And as long as there is this idea that there is someone who wants to put and give, it is difficult for me to think about (including?) also those who do not want to put and pay. So, the division seems complex to me. I understand that it is very fair that whoever has more should contribute more, but if you don't have enough, maybe you can contribute something else. And I would like that to happen all the time. You cannot contribute money? Then contribute whatever you want, but something else, so that it is not always the same people who give, and always the same people who receive. When there are possibilities and options. I am not saying anything about those who cannot work or those who cannot contribute, because that is why we agreed to live in community, right? To help each other. But not to “have a nerve” (OL: no para tener jeta). (short pause) As ESFG1_F4 said before, that there is “people that have a nerve” everywhere (OL: hay jetas en todas partes), but we have to put a limit so that everyone can walk in peace, I think.

(short pause)

ESFG1_M2: I also wanted, in line with what ESFG1_F3 was saying, that of course, many times there is this idea behind, I don't know, that "there are people" or "I know someone", and surely there are, just as you say, but I also think you have to consider, how to look at things from a certain... a while ago they were talking about the increase of the minimum wage in Spain, luckily it is 900€... of course, if the minimum wage is 650€ and you have a person, a father of a family, who has to work 40 hours a week to earn 650€, when if he doesn't do it he will receive I don't know how much unemployment, well, you also have to look at things... why don't we raise the minimum wage more to make people really want to work and earn a little more? For example. Or the conditions in which people live, what are the minimum conditions in which a person can be in order to... I mean, what is the minimum...?-

ESFG1_M6: -vital?-

ESFG1_M2: -What do you call it? decent? vital? necessary? For a person to be able to be in peace, right? And looking at it in that scenario, I think you could limit those kinds of cases. Or be considered as well.

ESFG1_F3: Yes, yes, yes. Anything that would control that people do not go to far (OL: no se pase de rosca). In other words, that they contribute what they have to and receive what they have to. Like a traditional “fair compensation” (OL: un justiprecio de toda la vida). Why do you have 950 euros? Because of a market situation, or because you have not felt like studying? So, that both things could be considered for those who could not and also for those who did not want to. But I say that I find it very complex. Thank God I don't have to decide, because I wouldn't know which way to go [laughs]-.

M: -Okay, and going back to the scenario of natural disasters: if, for example, there were some countries, which there surely are, with a higher risk of this type of disasters, fires, earthquakes... if Spain had to contribute more to this common fund than what it really needs, that is, than what it would receive in return, do you think that Spain should still participate in this type of mechanisms?

ESFG1_F4: I think so. Because, besides, now with natural disasters everything is very globalized, and therefore, I believe that the economic participation, or any other type, of the countries should be based on their strengths. If you are strong economically, you contribute more money; if you are strong technically or in terms of personnel, maybe you can contribute that. But even if there are... What I believe is that you cannot, you should not, penalize countries that suffer more natural disasters, for example. Because it is something that... Someone may think that: "in such and such a place, I don't know, the river always overflows, always, and there are tremendous floods, and, therefore, it has to contribute more because in the end the resources always go there". If these floods are something that cannot be avoided, then I believe that no one should be penalized. Another thing is that they could, I don't know, modify the river bed or do things, and then they don't do it. But if they are things that are unavoidable, they should not be penalized. And I don't think contributions should be modified according to how many natural disasters you have. Mostly also because there are things that can be generated, for example, with all the climate change, in all the countries that are polluting more and the natural disasters are in another country.

ESFG1_M1: I was thinking about this before, and it is true that normally you cannot put it in terms of: "if you have more floods you have to pay more", because that is very simplistic. But it does open the door to, which is something that you also commented before, to the European Union saying: "well, okay, to be able to participate in this fund to receive aid you have to implement a series of risk prevention policies" which, well, that would be very particular to each case. But that would be a way of controlling how much money has to be spent on helping countries in the event of natural disasters. But it also intervenes in the domestic policies of each country.

M: What do the rest of you think about this? To put conditions in exchange for participating in a mechanism like this?

ESFG1_M6: It seems to me... I didn't realize it, but it seems fundamental. It's like, I remember, in England I heard once that, if you go to get treated for a lung problem and you're a smoker, they wouldn't treat you. They would tell you, "Stop smoking first." Because in the end it's the same thing, you go to get treated for a lung problem, but if you don't stop smoking you'll never solve it. But that, something like that, would be good. That is to say, aid conditioned to the fact that you take measures to avoid repeatedly, if you can avoid it, of course. I think that's fundamental.

ESFG1_F5: What I think... the example you give of the natural disaster is, I think... I don't know, it's difficult. Because in the end it is something of force majeure. But I do see that maybe, by principle of solidarity, right? Well, if a State is in a difficult situation... as now with the La Palma disaster you mentioned, and then the reconstruction and what it implies... then it is necessary. Another thing is that things like, well, like the economy of a country, because there are corrupt policies that have caused the economy not to do so well, that is another story, because that is something more provoked, perhaps. But something that is natural, is that, well, I don't know how you can attack it.

M: Okay, that's just it... I wanted to change the scenario. Let's imagine now that another financial or economic crisis like the one in 2008 breaks out, and in this economic crisis Spain is a country that is little affected and there are other countries in the European Union that are very, very affected. How do you think Spain should act in this scenario? Should it collaborate? How should it act?

ESFG1_F3: To let {money} go, right? If you have not been affected, it is your turn to you to give, right?

ESFG1_M6: I do not see the need for help from other countries so clearly. As we mentioned before, it depends on what happens and that the country itself also should wash its dirty dishes, not leaving it to others to wash them. If it is an economic problem, real estate, then the country itself must also have its own mechanisms to organize this... and as it happened here, I believe that the {money} injections given to the banks came from the country itself, not from other countries.

ESFG1_M1: I do believe that we should collaborate, especially taking into account that, I do not know if it is true or not, but it fits me, the fact that when we joined the European Union we received more than we lent. So it would be a bit like giving back what we received. And, in any case, simply because we are members of the European Union, if there really is a crisis and there are countries that need it, and we are members and we can participate, well, I think we should do it.

ESFG1_F5: Although in that case it would be conditional. That is, "we give this help, but in exchange for doing changes", right? Regarding what you were saying about the banks [addressing ESFG1_M6], well, the same thing. Let's see the conditions, because it is not given as a gift either. That is, in the case of a natural disaster it is necessary, but in this case with some conditions: "This aid will come if certain changes are made”.-

ESFG1_M6: -Or loans. I also believe that loans can be made.

ESFG1_M1: The changes are complicated because here, for example, the conditions set by the European Union when it gave us money to make cuts in everything, including health, public education, etc., etc., were not very well received. So, normally, as I was saying before, it gives a lot of power to the Union over the domestic policy of each country. (short pause) Well, it is a complicated issue to discuss.

[00:40:30]

ESFG1_F4: I agree with him [referring to a participant], that yes... I think we should consider it in terms of, not thinking maybe in a specific scenario of a specific country that is doing badly, but simply the same way we pay IRPF or whatever it is every year and you pay it and pay it and pay it. Nobody tells you if those taxes go to teachers, if they are going to build a road or if they are transferred to an autonomous community for I don't know what. You pay it and that's it, and then it is used for whatever is needed, or for whatever is decided to be needed. And I think that the contribution of the countries should also be, ours and everybody's, a little bit like that. You give your contribution to the European Union every year and then it will be used for whatever is needed. If one year or at a certain moment there is a big economic crisis in a country and we have to support it... because in the end, it is not in anyone's interest that within the European Union there is a country where everything is going badly. In the end, we all lose out, because a country that is going to collapse is a lot of people who can consume, which in the end is what is moving everything, who are not going to have money for that. People who are going to want to leave their country in any way with a ( )... in other words, it is a disaster for everybody in the end. And that's it. I was going to say something else, but I forgot it [laughs].

ESFG1_M1: Not only that, but it may also happen that initially the crisis is not so bad, but if we do not help it will get worse... and then we cannot let it fall and it will end up being more expensive. So maybe it is better to help from the beginning and it is better for everyone.

ESFG1_F4: And then... I remember [laughs]... another thing you had said [referring to ESFG1_M1], which was, well, when policies imposed by Europe came, because Europe... well, in the end, I think that... I mean, there is no turning back. At least right now. A country, when it decides to enter, knows that it is going to have bad things, but it knows that it is going to have to give up part of its sovereignty, or whatever you want to call it. It knows that things are going to be imposed and that they are going to be the same for the whole European Union, because it is European policy and it is for everybody. So, the thing is that, depending on... because, in the end, in the European Union there are elections, there are governments, and depending on the color of the political parties in government, the policies imposed by the European Union may be more to the liking of one or the other. And they can go more towards the development of public services or towards cuts, or more capitalist or less, or whatever you want to call them. But, in the end, I believe that they are two different things. One thing is to be within the European Union and to assume that there are going to be policies imposed on us, but that the way these policies have to be may change, and they do not always have to be the same. In fact, I believe that one good thing about the European Union, or what I would like to see, is that politically it should be strengthened. Because, in the end, for the last... I do not know how many years, but in the end we are going through the... in other words, the economies of the countries are changing and so are the companies. And before we had small companies that have been growing and now there are multinationals and conglomerates of companies with a tremendous capacity of influence in everybody's life; and the interests they pursue are those of the companies, and these are what they are: to make money. So, then, there are times when they influence us for the better and times when they influence us for the worse. And sometimes they are such big economic conglomerates with so much power, and so much lobbying power, that then, perhaps, governments fall very short to be able to deal with things that are not convenient for me or for the citizens. So I think that the European Union, if politically strengthened, could be a counterweight. As everything grows, so do we: instead of a vision of a country, a vision of a Union.

M: And, if in the same scenario of the economic crisis, Spain were the most affected, how would you expect the rest of the European Union countries, or the European Union as an institution, to act?

ESFG1_M6: I think that in the European Union it should work a bit like a parliament. Like in Spain. In that parliament all countries are represented, all parties. There will be more from one party than another, more from one country than another. And in the end, the money that each country contributes to this European Union will form the annual budget which will include emergencies, will include unforeseen expenses, will include all those kinds of things. And there will be decisions like helping Spain because of floods, which will be debated in the parliament whether to do it or not, and to which part of the budget it will be allocated.

ESFG1_F5: Yes, I think that in the end, as an affected country, what you expect is help from others, right? Because that is what we say, "give and take". Well, at other times we have given more, we have been able to give more, and when you need help is when you expect that the rest of the States can help you. That is one of the advantages, I think, of the European Union. In principle.

(short pause)

M: Does the rest agree?

ESFG1_F3: I think it is the same for everybody. Whatever your name is: Italy, France or whatever. When you have, you give, and when you don't have, you get. But because of this principle of help, of solidarity. So it doesn't matter if lightning strikes or a crisis occurs because Lehman Brothers collapses or whatever. If you have, you give, and when you don't have, you get. That is reciprocity.

ESFG1_M6: I'm not really sure that solidarity is a budget item [laughs].

ESFG1_F3: Yeah, also, also that [laughs].

ESFG1_M6: I believe that one thing is the money that is collected, because for a series of expenses that still (may occur?) or catastrophes, and another thing is that society mobilizes or that countries show solidarity and want to make donations to another country to help it. Totally respectable and valuable.

ESFG1_F3: I agree, ESFG1_M6, there are more things. What happens is that European Union, Euro came out {probably referring to the list of words in the first question}, but it is that at the end there is money. When you talk about aid, you talk about money. When you talk about economics, you talk about money. Everything else, which is fantastic, you can put it or not in that overall concept. Which is actually missed, huh?

M: Do you think this is how the European Union works nowadays? With solidarity...

(long pause)

ESFG1_M1: I mean, what I am going to say does not mean that it is not solidary, I am saying that I do not think that is why it makes the decisions it does. It's probably more like he describes [referring to ESFG1_M6]: that there are budgets, there are a number of people involved, and decisions are made based on the resources available and the needs of the problem. But, as much as we would all like to say "yes, you need it, take some", the reality is that things are not always like that and there are a number of real-life constraints that you have to deal with. So, in that sense, I would not say that it is solidarity that drives the European Union.

ESFG1_F5: I also think this is difficult, because it is growing more and more. So, you include new countries, with their differences. So, it is difficult to have that solidarity among all of them, and the European Union is getting bigger and bigger.

ESFG1_F4: Yes, I believe that in the end the European Union is driven by the economy. Not solidarity. But it is because, if you have countries... that is, if new countries enter the European Union, apart from the fact that it is understood that they can be European countries, but what they are looking at is the economy. That is why they have a process, and they are measured to see if they can enter or not, and you have to adapt and I don't know what else. And if it is decided that a country is going to enter, it is because it is understood that it is going to be beneficial for the country and for the Union. And then, what is needed are countries that develop more and more. So I believe that all the distribution of funds from one country to another that is done throughout the European Union is with the objective of raising countries up... that is, to develop them more so that they can be strong in whatever, in their industry, in whatever. That their consumption is strengthened, that the market within the European Union, well, “look, that’s another country where you can sell your products, your services, the movement of people”. So, I think that is the idea: solidarity yes, but it is not neutral solidarity, it is solidarity because you want the economy in general to improve. And in fact I think that all these things, when they appear on TV, for example, politicians from Central Europe or other countries saying that... well, with the typical clichés of "the south of Europe, they are lazier, less lazy or more lazy”, I don't know... in the end it is a solidarity that stings, because the funds move from one country to another and they help each other, but without much... It doesn't sound fair, I don't know.

[00:50:46]

ESFG1_M1: To the question "if Spain were the country most affected by the crisis, what would you expect the European Union to do?", what I would like is for them to give us the money, but indeed, as she says (referring to ESFG1_F4?), it is usually specific countries that always need help. So, I wouldn't be surprised if they would start to raise objections if, all of a sudden, we were the ones who needed it.

ESFG1_F5: I also remember, when they were saying the news about the PIGS, among which Spain was, you felt a little bit like "wow, we are the...".-

ESFG1_M1: -"second-rate country", right?-

ESFG1_F5: -Exactly. Then one felt a little bit like ( ) saying "damn!", which in our country it is normal, you know? That is what we have: our country is bigger so we have more inequalities. But it hurts a bit.

ESFG1_M6: I think we have to differentiate between aid to a country for, I don't know, agriculture, or ecological issues, or everything that is included in a budget, and then, aid of a solidarity type, which goes in different ways. I know a little about international cooperation and humanitarian aid, and I remember once a person from the government came to tell us: "we can donate aid to other countries, but what we cannot do is to impoverish ourselves at the expense of helping other countries". So, we start giving things that are of no use to us, we start giving things that we already have outdated, we are going to give them that kind of aid that, in the end, is also benefiting us in some way. So, I imagine that at the European level it must be something similar. That is to say, they are not going to give things impoverishing themselves, are they?

MA: This is very interesting. So, are solidarity on the one hand and economy on the other hand compatible?

ESFG1_M6: There is a percentage… there can be a percentage, for example it is how it is done with the aid to international cooperation, which (is around 0.7%?) of the GDP, and however, only northern European countries reach that percentage, and others like the United States that gives 0.01%, and Spain was at 0.1% or so. But, yes, in the whole budget there can be an item that is "humanitarian aid". But that is not solidarity. Let's say, to participate in the humanitarian aid that is needed for an emergency or for development, but it is not like there is a flood and we are going to give money disinterestedly to this country to solve it. Maybe if it is budgeted, then yes, but then we also have to count on the solidarity aid of the countries at a personal level. That is to say, what is normally done when (it happens?), which is to appeal to society and ask for its help. That is what NGOs do, in fact. NGOs work with the money, a small part of the money given by the government, and most of the work they do is with the money given by the people, from their pockets. In other words, we pay twice, we pay the State, which does not do its job, and then we have to put in our part as well, from our pocket.

M: Well, one last scenario I would like to raise. Taking into account that there are inequalities between countries in the European Union and there are also inequalities within each country in the European Union, do you think that the European Union should address this problem? For example, should it have a common scheme to address inequality from a European level, or is it a responsibility that should fall on each country independently?

ESFG1_M1: But... I am sorry, they are different questions, because the European Union could level the countries, but the inequality within each country might not, because of the other possibility you were mentioning, which is that each country takes care of its own and that's it. Those are two different measures that you are contemplating.

ESFG1_F4: You [addressing the moderator] mean that there is... that the European Union puts in place whatever it takes to ensure that inequalities within each country are... [gestures as if she does not understand the question]

(short pause)

M: It's true, you're right...-

ESFG1_F4: -I'm asking is that no...-

M: -Yes, yes, we better go separately [laughs]. Should the European Union address the issue of inequalities between countries? Should it have plans to level this out?

ESFG1_F4: It seems basic to me because otherwise, economically, we are not going to function well.

ESFG1_M1: Yes.

ESFG1_M6: I think it is a requirement. To belong to the European Union, they set you a series of objectives. I think you have to have a series of basic economic, labor, ecological, etc. conditions, and then acquire the commitments that allow you to reach the minimums that are, as we said before, more or less equal for all countries. Otherwise, it would not be fair either. In other words, that is what the European Union is all about, seeking stability and equality at all levels.

ESFG1_F5: Yes, although I think it would be complicated. I mean, you can't make an average, because in the end the average is going to come out [making some gesture], right? But yes, as you said. I mean, everyone has their own social, work and economic structure, which makes it difficult to reach an average... but well, it would be ideal.

ESFG1_M6: I think it is an ideal, and in fact it is possible that we are failing. I am not saying that the European Union is a project that will fail, we don't know, we will have to see. But I have heard it once: "to what extent can the European Union be a failure?", that remains to be seen. Look at England, they have it very clear.

ESFG1_F3: For me equality yes, but upwards. In other words, we should not be equal so that we are all worse, of course. It seems to me that of every good thing that each society has, there is much to contribute to others, as long as it is something that means welfare. I'm getting myself into a messy land, because some will say: "my welfare is to have a TV" and others "I'd rather have a cow". I don't know, but I say in things such as in health, in welfare, in what is... Here everybody has to be able to eat a piece of meat a week, in any part of the European Union. Absolutely, upwards. With the help of whatever, with the contribution of whatever. I mean not to leave it all in the economic part but also in, I don't know, when we were talking before about where it stays in Spain... if someone were to decide which is the place that makes the best jamones in Europe, then Extremadura would come out, or some regions would come out that... if you are going to look at other data, at other issues that the region may have, it would be a disaster, right? Minimum wage, average wage, well, horrible; but now we are going to include other issues which are less economic but also a lot of welfare, of life, of quality of life. I think that the only thing we cannot give to the north are hours of sunshine, or things like that, like saying "take it, I am going to give you 10 days a year of sunshine like the one in Madrid". Well, no, but a lot of other things can be given, even sometimes that don't mean money.

ESFG1_M6: It is exported, isn't it? The oil, the ham…

ESFG1_F3: Sure, yes, yes, yes, but proud to get it from here, from this part of Europe.

ESFG1_F4: I do believe that there should also be at least an ideal, and from there establish a policy. "Does Europe want to be more or less unequal?" Well, what do we want to be? More equal. Why? Well, first, because if not, economically it will not work. But it will also have other implications, because if inequalities continue to grow there may be much more insecurity, we will have more health problems... In other words, in the end the costs will be elsewhere and worse. So, if Europe wants to be more equal, there has to be a European Union policy that guides the countries, all of them, in the same direction. And what is it that... Well, just as everybody said "we have to do this economically", in terms of inequality: "this way, this way" and that it should be similar in all the countries to be on a par. What are our objectives going to be, let’s say, in four years' time? "Well, we are going to go this way, or that way". I believe that this can be set, within the European Union. And then also, as she was mentioning [referring to ESFG1_F3] about Extremadura and the things that are done well in each place... and I was also thinking about the development of the companies in each place... because if you have companies you have jobs, you have workers, you have salaries, and you develop the country. And I was also thinking that if countries have very different tax policies and compete among themselves to attract companies, that is not beneficial either. And what that is generating is inequalities, because you take to the country that may have a less strong fiscal policy with the companies, that may allow them not to pay taxes or whatever, because they take the companies there. Or the companies are not there, but they pay there. Physically they are not, but they are incorporated there. So, in the end, instead of helping countries to build the standard of living, what it does is to end up separating them. And I don't know, these are things that may not be directly related to inequalities, but which in the end have an influence, don't they?

(short pause)

[01:00:01]

M: Okay, and now thinking about what you were saying [referring to ESFG1_F4], about inequalities in society, within each country, should this be a problem addressed by each country independently, or also at the European level should there be a common scheme or policies to combat social inequality within each country?

ESFG1_F3: I believe that the minimum should be very common. That is to say, but very established from a very general and very firm strategy, right? No more “solemnly poor” people in Europe. Period. So, where is that minimum line. And after that minimum line, each region, each country can pull. But these things are very minimal, almost of ethical intelligence, of working on a common basis, which also seems to me to fit very well with Europe, with the sense of being European, with all our historical trajectory. I believe that these bases, if they are marked there, strong and powerful, are a guarantee that we are going to work for it. I am talking about it as that in Europe there is no death penalty. I believe that being European... that is, from this base, from here, you cannot go down. As it happens with quality, isn't it? With food or with products. “In China you can have this toy but not in Europe”. Well, I would like to see that also in other daily aspects of life.

ESFG1_M1: I just wanted to mention that it is natural, let's say, when you talk about equality to tend to think about poverty and setting minimums and such, but it is also interesting to think about what you do with the top end. What are the fiscal policies, how do you prevent the rich from getting even richer? In case we want to discuss this.

ESFG1_F5: I also believe that, on this point, I think that the European Union would have to make more recommendations, because in the end each country is sovereign and has to see the capacity it has for changes, and so on. But also one of the advantages of being a Member State is that there are, I do not know, working groups, exchanges between, I do not know... in general. Well, the ministry of labor of each country, well, in policies against unemployment. That is to say, things such as exchanges of opinions and see what is being said there, if they can, perhaps, be done in Spain. But more like recommendations and exchange forums.

M: I am interested in this, do you think there should be an unemployment scheme at the European level, as it exists in each country, a program of unemployment assistance, and this kind of thing, at the European level?

ESFG1_M1: It would be very complicated to know how much they pay, unless you put that it is paid with the same money that each country already paid, because the cost of living in each country is very different. So, if you unify it, how do you decide how much to pay? It seems complicated to me in that sense.

ESFG1_M6: I believe that inequality within a country is closely related to inequality between countries. In the end, I think it is the same thing. If there is inequality within a country, that generates inequality between countries. I believe that the European Union demands a series of things from us, it puts a series of conditions that we have to fulfill. We receive aid to make them possible, and then we have to be accountable: "What have you done with the money we have given you? Have you fulfilled the objectives? Very good" pat on the back. "Oh, no? Then pay a penalty or whatever it is". If there are policies to reach a minimum of emissions of pollutants into the atmosphere and they give you money to invest it in this and you do not achieve it, then they will have to penalize it in some way.

(long pause)

ESFG1_F4: I was thinking... the truth is that I would be more in favor of doing something a little more than recommendations. I think that something stronger than recommendations could be done, or forums where experiences could be exchanged between countries. That is very good, and could be the basis. But I believe that from that point onwards we would have to develop a policy with minimum standards, as in other matters that must be complied with. I don't know if it makes much sense... [laughs] I don't know what to call it. I don't know if I see a "policy against inequality". No... Inequality, in the end, is... you are not unequal because you are unequal, you are unequal because you do not have access to work, or because the access you have to work is very precarious, or because you are earning in black, in the underground economy, or because housing prices are so high that you do not have access to a roof over your head, or because you have learning difficulties and you have no one to support you, and then you are not able to finish a minimum education. So, in the end, I do not know if it is a "policy against inequality" as such, but it would be rather that all those factors that influence the fact that there are people who live well and people who live badly and do not reach minimum standards, should be taken into account in each policy, from a housing policy to an employment policy, so that these policies themselves should be used to eliminate inequalities. Because I do not know if the other...

(short pause)

ESFG1_M1: Of course, the problem is that the casuistry of each country is probably very different. So, trying to solve the inequality of each country is going to be quite complicated, I think, from the European framework. Because everyone is different (OL: cada uno es de su padre o de su madre; each one belongs to its father or its mother). But well, as ( ) I guess it would be fine.

ESFG1_F4: Yes, because it is true that there are some things that are very different. Because, for example, our labor market has nothing to do with that of the countries around us. But there are things that are more global. Because, for example, the problem of access to housing in the big cities and the depopulation of rural areas is happening in Spain, it is happening everywhere, in Germany and everywhere. Also, the problem, I think, right now, with the issue of fuel and energy. And in the end, what is happening? It is also generating inequality, because in the end it is a good that is becoming more and more of a luxury. And it is a basic good, because if you cannot heat yourself, if you cannot turn on the stove, you cannot turn on the light... and not only for citizens, but also for companies. And this is happening all over Europe. And that is going to be a factor of inequality: there are those who can afford it and those who cannot. So, I believe that there are things that are very different, but there are problems that influence inequalities, which are common.

ESFG1_M6: Perhaps there is also a question of competencies, as is the case with the {autonomous} communities and the national government. There are things like education and health that are competencies of the {autonomous} community, other aspects are competencies of the state, and then the European Union will have competencies in other aspects where they do not intersect with the other autonomous and national governments, although they are related.

(short pause)

M: Okay, just to close... we have talked about many issues here in the conversation. Do you think that all this that we have talked about is somehow related to the future of Spain in the European Union, or to the future of the European Union in general? Are these issues that we have discussed associated with the future of the European Union, or are they independent of this?

ESFG1_F3: Everything adds up and everything counts. I believe that in the world we live in, it is more and more real that “a butterfly flaps its wings in Beijing and it touch you”. And I believe that absolutely everything counts. I think that, personally, the idea of delving into the idea of a Europe united in a lot of things is very interesting, and there are more and more of them. Respecting this ( ), the identity of each one of the countries, of the regions, of the cities or whatever, but it is the only way, as the world is getting. Giant super powers, each one thinking in a different way with sometimes very conflicting interests.

[01:10:37]

ESFG1_F5: Yes, I think it is an issue that clearly affects the future of the European Union, because if there is discontent within a country, and there can be in all countries, but if there is discontent within a group such as this one, then we will see what was mentioned before, the Brexit... So, maybe it is to avoid that. I mean, we are growing, but we don’t want others to leave. And it would be good to say: "well, don't feel that you are always giving and you are not getting anything in return". In other words, there should be a little more harmony, to say "I am compensated for being in the European Union", right?

ESFG1_F4: I think that all issues, especially with regard to the poor, for example, because it is an issue that is very hard for citizens: "what if I give... what if you are giving this money... what if we have contributed and we don't get our share...". Well, it is a fight for what one contributes and what one receives. It is the same thing that is happening in Spain, but at the European Union level. So, I believe that this issue, that of inequalities, is fundamental, and the fiscal issue as well. And the citizen, the ordinary people, has to see that being within the European Union is bringing good things. Because if this is not seen, it is a failure, it is going to be a failure. And it is being a failure, because there is the Brexit and because more and more, in all countries, there are more and more political parties that are against belonging to the European Union. And that is because what they perceive is that they don't get enough, or they give more than they get, or they don't get what is expected, or whatever. But I also think that the European Union has a very big communication problem [several nod]. And I think that, as I said before, we are in the European Union, but we are in countries, and the countries, each one, have their own governments. And the governments, what they want to make their citizens see is everything they do well. So, the European Union is mentioned when it is for bad things: "This has to be done because Europe forces us to do it! It is because Europe is forcing us". And "because Europe is forcing us", we have to cut budget back, we have to do I don't know what. But when it is something like: "now we are going to do all of this this with all the money that has come from Europe", we can sell our products all over Europe because all the regulations are the same and they are valid for all countries, or, I can move from one country to another {there’s nothing}. Because there are not enough campaigns of the European Union as such, neither in general nor within each country. I don't know. The European Union is being talked about only when there is something bad.

ESFG1_F3: Because this, in Spain, the fact that education, for example, was {an} autonomous {competency}, while before, well... I don't know, a silly example, but if you studied the rivers, you didn't study the rivers of the {autonomous} community; you studied the rivers of all Spain. If you don't have this perspective since you are a child, and you have: "look, these are the rivers of your town, these are the rivers of the autonomous community, these are the rivers of Spain and these are the great rivers of Europe", you go little by little sowing this spirit of culture. And if you don't... Because this doesn't come if you don't feel it inside, if you don't know it, in the end… because of what you are saying, we have all traveled a lot to Europe and we feel it, but if you have not done it, why are you going to feel it and live it? If you only get a part of their news, in their world.

M: And to put it another way: thinking about what we have talked about, how do you see the future of the European Union? Where is it going, which way is it going?

ESFG1_M6: To me ( )... I have heard a lot this that "Europe is forcing us", it reminds me of what I was saying before. In the end, we are excluding ourselves. "Europe forces us", as if we were not Europe. And in the end, we are Europe. It is like when students say "{the teacher} has suspended me" or "I have passed", isn't it? And I believe that the natural thing is to tend towards union. Union. The ideal is to have many countries united, with common policies, with common guidelines, working towards the good of the European Union, which would make us more stable, safer, greener, with more welfare. That is the ideal. Nowadays, when someone thinks of separating, as it happens with England, which has separated, or with other {autonomous} communities in Spain, everybody throws their hands on their heads and we think: "Where are you going? Where are you going? In a society where we would have to unite to be stronger, you are thinking of leaving?". We all know that's destined to fail. The thing is, this is a project, and I think we're growing and experimenting, and we don't know what's going to happen yet. It may or may not work, but it also depends on what the people who have the power to put this project in place and to carry it out do. If it turns into more bureaucracy, if it turns into more expenses, if it turns into more problems, it may fail in the end. But that’s what we have to work on, don't we?

ESFG1_F5: I think that the context in which the European Union was created is very different from the present one. I mean, perhaps it was more oriented towards an ideal of peace, or something like that, and then it has been turning more towards the economy: that is, the single market, the Euro. And, at the political level, well, neither, because each one is a sovereign State, but we are seeing, perhaps, what we were saying: that if there is a kind of separation of countries because they no longer feel part of this, then, in the end, a domino effect is produced. And it can be dangerous, because you have already created a group and now what you see is that it is disintegrating. So, what you are saying is also in the long term. But well, it is very different. And I think that the COVID situation has helped us to see more help, to say: "this is something that affects us all". That is, at a global level, but also at a... And there was help, wasn't there? So well, in the end it's like ( ), there are good things and bad things, but at least to prevent it from disintegrating. I mean, it is something that you've already created. And adapt to the current situation. And that’s all.

ESFG1_M6: COVID is a good example, because effectively if you are in the European Union you have had more access to vaccines and other advantages that others have not had. Or also what you were talking about.

(long pause)

M: Well, that about wraps it up. I just want to know if anyone, during the conversation, has had any ideas or thought of any topics that we haven't addressed that you would like to throw on the table at the last minute

ESFG1_M2: I wanted to say... well, I think it was addressed, I just got to thinking and I did not finish commenting on it, it was when you talked about this idea of the European Union seeking to reduce inequality. And of course, I think we all think that yes, that should be the ideal, we should try to reduce it, to be less unequal, but also, on the other hand, I was thinking that here we are six people and surely each one of us has six different views on how we should do it. So this would concentrate power in one organization, in one single body, which in the end, who knows who is the one who finally makes decision. And thinking about what you said [addressing ESFG1_M1] when you said: "sure, they gave us certain loans, but cuts in health, cuts in education", and many times they are recommendations that, in their own countries, Germany or France, they do not make them, right? Spain has certain cuts that they do not have. So, on the one hand, it is very difficult to support that. On the other hand, I also thought that it is true that countries are still sovereign, but there have already been several cases where the country votes for something and finally the government cannot do it, as it happened with Greece and Syriza, where the government had to resign and say: "I cannot do it, because they do not allow me to make decisions that we want to make". So, I don't know, I think that in that sense all this opens up to start discussing what are those minimums, what does it consist of or what are we thinking for inequality to be able to stop it, should we concentrate so much power, or not? That’s all.

ESFG1_M1: I mean, of course, here I think we have been talking all the time about hypothetics, ideals, and it is easy to have an opinion about it. But, in fact, when you try to put a number on the thing and see how the regulations are really going to be, it is very difficult to get your hands on it.

ESFG1_M6: I am concerned that the decisions taken at the European Union level are not appropriate for the specific country for which they are taken. This reminds me a bit of what happened in international cooperation when the European Union decided on the structural aid policies and the adjustments that countries had to make for development, and then they proved to be a failure. I am concerned that this power that the European Union has over the countries ends up causing situations that are not as expected. And I do not like either, and it has been commented here, how, when in a country we decide who we want to govern us and what policies we want for our country, we discover that all this is diluted or interrupted, or the political parties are not able to implement it because of the pressures at the European Union level.

[01:20:43]

ESFG1_M1: I find this interesting, because you say: "I am worried that the European Union will make the wrong decision on this", which is true. But a little bit the same can happen with your own government, that it does something you don't agree with. And yet it seems to hurt more if it comes from outside. So, in a sense, there is some truth to the idea that Europe is "the others". That's just it.

ESFG1_M6: To point out, I agree with you, but I think it is easier... I mean, the one who is living day by day knows better what is happening and what the solution is than the one who is in another city, another country, another State, etcetera. So, in this sense, I believe that the closer you are to the local level, the easier it is to make the right decisions, and the further away you are, the more everything is diluted and the more complicated it is to make the right decisions.

ESFG1_M1: And yet, we are probably much more aware of the decisions taken in our own country, in the sense that they are much more publicized, and that is also a bit like what you were saying before: that the European Union is a bit of a mysterious entity, that it is there. And well, I think that all of us here agree that we do not know very well what it does or how it works. And it is a bit of an image problem. I also understand that, as it is a supranational complex, probably the things it deals with, the ordinary citizen is unable to understand. It's very difficult to make that be known to people who isn’t experts. But, yeah, we don't know very well what's going on in the European Union.

ESFG1_F3: I, for my part, being the European Parliament a... assuming that all the countries decide who are going to be our representatives and that it is a democracy, I understand that for now we have not been able to find anything better than that. With all the difficulties that it has, and with all the things that are happening in the world in the difficulties of each country, I hope, and I cross my fingers, that the European Union will be stronger every day, better in all the things that it has to do regarding its contribution in the world. What corresponds to the number of people we are on the planet, and what corresponds to the very great decisions that are taken that affect the future of everything. I feel much calmer as a citizen thinking that I live in Europe and that I belong to Europe than anything else. And I just hope that everything goes upwards and not as ESFG1_M6 and ESFG1_F5 were commenting about these movements that there are, which I think come and go. Hopefully, in my thinking, they will go soon. From time to time they come, and from time to time they go, but I think there is no other way out. As long as we do not know how to do it better, it seems to me the best we can have, in a democracy at European level, with people who want us to do things better, right? (short pause) It seems to me that this was as if I were giving a homily [laughter]. “Peace, Love, and all that”. Money too, also some Peace and all that, but I'm talking about money too, and having a job, being safe at home, knowing that when I retire I can have another life to do.

ESFG1_M2: I wanted to ask something, which has not come up in the conversation, and I don't know if it has something to do with it or not, but I feel that sometimes we also forget... because of course, obviously nowadays the economy is very important for everything, and Europe, as you were saying [addressing a participant] is: "let's fight against China, the United States, Russia; let's get together to be strong and protect ourselves", but I also think that many times we forget that 70 years ago all these countries were killing each other [several nod]. And the fact that today we say "well, I am European, we have the European Parliament", the Erasmus program, the fact of promoting much more the feeling, the generation of a new transnational or more European identity, it seems to me that this is also something that is surely taken into account in high organizations and that’s why we try to promote so much, precisely, all this as well. I mean, to sustain this good coexistence or this coexistence that we have now.

ESFG1_F3: I find it beautiful to read here [reading the project information sheet] that this is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research [laughs], here at <address where the focus group was held in Madrid>.

ESFG1_M1: And we've given Germany a hard time [laughs].

ESFG1_F3: Yes, yes, yes, yes.

ESFG1_M6: I don't know if Spain does something similar, right?

ESFG1_F3: I wish, I wish. I would love to think that it is done. If it has been done and I don't know, I would love to know. I am sure it is, because if this is a good way to do things, it has to be done this way.

ESFG1_M6: Well, we are not at the forefront in research and development.

M: I don't know if you want to add anything else, MA?

MA: If you agree, what I am going to do now is to quickly mention all the topics we have touched on and if someone feels identified, wants to clarify something or whatever, you can take the chance, and after that we will close, okay? So, we have talked about ((economic aids, solidarity, the European Union as a project in process, and about different scenarios. In these cases, we have raised the idea if Spain would have to assume an additional cost to help other countries and that we, as individuals, can be responsible as well. Do you think that Spain should assume that additional cost in such cases?))

M: Well, anyone who wants to pick up a topic and comment on something?

ESFG1_M6: Well, in answer to this last question, I believe that this is indeed the case. We have commented that Spain has to comply with a series of requirements and obligations that force it to tighten its belt, to decide its policies on health, education, or whatever, contrary to, perhaps, what {the government} has proposed in its political campaign to win its votes "because Europe demands it". That is what I don't like, in fact, about the European Union. The fact of how our... what we have voted for by electing a political party is sometimes introduced {he might mean interfered}.

ESFG1_F5: Yes, I think the additional cost is like we were saying, it is part of the game: we are in and we benefit at some moments, and then maybe we contribute at another moment, but it is because you received before. So it is that feeling of giving and receiving. And about the individual {responsibility} that you mentioned, I see that one is very small in comparison. What can I do as an individual? You may even have brilliant ideas and so on, but you say "how can I reach a forum where my voice can be heard? So, in the face of such a big European Union and everything... and it's essential that the voice of the citizen is heard. But what methods are there to make yourself heard in the European Union?

ESFG1_M6: Maybe at the ballot box, voting, choosing our representatives. That in fact, when there are elections, who votes? [laughs]

ESFG1_F5: Of course, and then the thing is to be lucky enough so the one you want comes out, right?

[01:30:25]

ESFG1_M1: I find this question of individual responsibility interesting, but I'm not quite sure how it relates to the European Union, because they seem to me like completely, not opposites, but on two very different scales. So, in that sense, at best I can appeal to that feeling of belonging to Europe and expect that it, if so, would make each individual feel more inclined to donate. But I don't see how the European Union, as an institution or as a body, has anything to do with the contribution of each individual.

ESFG1_F3: I think it goes with the socialization of the person, with how each one feels. I remember when the Prestige broke up, do you remember? That terrible accident in Galicia with all the beaches full of tar, and I remember the people who were there were from all over Spain. It didn't matter. "And you, here, why did you come? Me, here, to pick up the tar. Why? Because I feel that this is my land, this is my sea too" and you live 500 kilometers away. To me, as an individual, as a person, as a citizen, they say "hey, there is a tragedy in, I don't know, in Milan, they are asking for help", and I ask my self "would I assume that tragedy in Milan in the same way as one that happens in Galicia"? If I have the culture of being Europe, yes, of course, I think so. But if I think that it is alien... and I am not even sure I know the capitals of all the countries in Europe right now. I mean, If we do a trivia game, I don't know if I’ll be in a hurry [laughs]. Well, to feel {European} you have to live it, you have to do it, traveling, getting to know the people, the countries, the things. But it is something you have to have grown up with and cultivated. Those of us who are older, I believe that we have not lived it, it was made on the fly, and it seems to me that we are losing a very big opportunity, right now, with the younger people. To make them feel in their minds something bigger: you are from your neighborhood, you are from Madrid, you are from your province, you are from your {autonomous} community, you are from Spain, you are from Europe, you are from the world, from the planet. And whatever happens, you leave it out very foolishly. Because of the criticism that ESFG1_M1 said before, I would be with the little flag of Europe here {pointing her lapel}, and I haven’t met almost anything in Europe.

(short pause)

M: Is there anything else anyone would like to comment on?

(short pause)

ESFG1_M1: Well, it just seemed curious to me, precisely in the case of the Prestige that was mentioned... I don't know if in that case, if there was something similar in Milan or even in another place further away from the European Union, I don't know if it would depend so much on how European each one feels, as on how much media coverage they have. Because I was a child, but I remember that the Prestige was in the soup, it was what was talked about all day... I mean, it was the talk of the town for months. And well, there is this typical conversation that maybe in Milan we would hear about it, but if it happens in Minsk, for example, it is not going to be in the news. So, it's not so much about how European you feel, but, first of all, that you can even hear about it, and then that it gets the hype.

ESFG1_F4: And of course, there are times when it gets to you... because there are things that you don't even know about, or you know about them because you see something tiny, but no. There are times when things come through the media, with images, with everything, that ( ) they break anyone's heart, and then I think that the desire to help can come even from the worst... even the meanest person would want to help in that situation, if they could. But it is also the facilities that you are given as an individual. Because if you are in Spain you take a bus to get to Galicia, or if there is a problem in another European country and there is infrastructure and facilities for you to move without problems, it is always easier than if you have to go to another continent. You need a visa to get there, and they will ask you "why are you coming here?”. So, even for those things it helps if there are facilities around....

(short pause)

M: ((Great, that's all. Thank you all very much for your collaboration. Each of your interventions has been very valuable to us. We hope you felt comfortable during the conversation...))