Press Conferences

EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner, European Commission President José Manuel Barroso & EU Ambassador to the US John Bruton, Press Conference, European Commission Delegation, Washington, DC, January 8, 2007.

PRESS CONFERENCE: EUROPEAN COMMISSION PRESIDENT JOSÉ MANUEL BARROSO, ACCOMPANIED BY EU EXTERNAL RELATIONS COMMISSIONER BENITA FERRERO-WALDNER

MONDAY, JANUARY 8, 2007

Transcript by:
Federal News Service
Washington, DC

European Commission Delegation Acting Head of Press & Public Diplomacy/Spokesperson Mattias Sundholm: He will be here at 2:30 as scheduled, so you will not have to wait much too long. Thank you. Any questions?

AMBASSADOR JOHN BRUTON: I’d like to welcome you to this press conference given by President of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso accompanied by the [EU] Commissioner for External Relations Benita Ferrero-Waldner. And I would invite the President to open proceedings.

JOSÉ MANUEL BARROSO: Thank you, John. It’s a pleasure to meet you now after a very successful meeting – very useful meeting with President Bush. This meeting with President Bush reflects the strong relationship between the United States and Europe. We are working together both to deepen our own relationship and to respond to the global challenges we face. Globalization, climate change, energy security, mass migration, the fight against terrorism are just some of our common challenges. With the values we share, we believe we are well placed to tackle this agenda.

We are also the largest economic relationship on the planet. We trade more than $1 billion a day in goods. Europe provides two-thirds of total global investment flows into the United States. In 2005, that amounted to $66.1 billion, by far the most significant source of foreign investment in the United States’ economy. Transatlantic economy is estimated to generate roughly $3 trillion in total commercial sales a year and employs roughly 14 million workers on both sides of the Atlantic. But we can do more, and I discussed with President Bush taking the transatlantic economic partnership further, faster and deeper. Chancellor Merkel’s initiative is timely and we will work with the European [Union German] Presidency, the Presidency of the Council [of the EU], and the United States to move things forward.

Our relation is also about people. It’s not just about trade and investment; it means people. And as I pointed out today during the meeting with the Speaker of the House, Mrs. Pelosi and the Senate majority leader, Senator Reid, when it comes to visa waiver, European Union citizens should be treated equally. But this is still not happening. While the United States citizens can travel without a visa to any European Union country, ten European Union Member States are still not included in existing visa waiver program of the United States. So there is a discrimination among European Union citizens. We look forward to examining concrete United States proposal in this regard. We welcome the announcement made recently by President Bush in Estonia of a revision of the visa waiver program.

Very substantial part of our talks today was about Doha world trade negotiations. President Bush and I agreed that we now face the moment of truth. If we are to make progress on the Doha trade negotiations, we really want to come to successful conclusion. If we do not, we risk losing all the substantial economic benefits that are on the table. It is too important to fail. We cannot fail. Doha is about raising living standards, but it is also about a true multilateral approach; it is also about development, aiding the poorest in our world.

We have also discussed in detail the issues of energy security and sustainability and climate change. Climate change was indeed one of the most important topics of our conversation. We believe energy and climate change are two sides of the same coin. The challenges of climate change, dependence on oil and higher energy prices are faced by the European Union and the United States. I have briefed President Bush on the proposals we will adopt on my return to Brussels next Wednesday.

The economic case is now clear that the costs of inaction against climate change are far greater than reforming our policies. Now, we need improved energy efficiency, better use of renewable energy and a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. And we believe that we have much to gain from working together. We have discussed possible bilateral cooperation on energy efficiency, research into alternative fuels such as biofuels and coordination of efforts on clean coal technologies, including carbon capture and storage. We have also discussed our cooperation on nuclear safety and the security of energy supplies with key third countries such as Russia.

We discussed also the Middle East peace process. This remains as difficult as ever, but with renewed engagement I believe an opportunity exists to make progress. The Israel-Palestine conflict must be addressed to make progress in other conflicts in the region. Ultimately, it is the parties themselves that must make peace. Without their will to do so, there is nothing we can do, but we should actively encourage them to make some progress.

We also discussed Iraq. President Bush and I, we are deeply concerned about the political and security situation. President Bush was sharing with me his concerns, but also his resolve and his confidence in bringing a better situation to Iraq, and I understand he’s going to make a statement about his policy to the American people very soon.

In the European Union, we believe it is important to bring stability to Iraq. It is, of course, important to the United States, but I’ll say it’s at least as important for the European Union. Iraq is almost our neighbor, so we have a great interest in the stability of Iraq. I can tell that in the European Union there is that feeling – the need to bring stability to Iraq.

Of course, we cannot separate military questions from political and economic ones. Of course, security cannot be dealt with in isolation, and we will also need action on the political and economic fronts. The European Union is united in wanting a democratic Iraq to succeed. We and Member States have contributed €35 billion since 2003 in grants, debt relief and loans. European Commission contribution has been €720 million, just our budget administered that part by Benita Ferrero-Waldner, who is with me today.

Finally, President Bush and I shared our concern at the situation in Darfur, where I was recently. We both agreed that the international presence must be assured to stop this tragedy. And there were several other issues that were discussed and as always in a very open, friendly, frank manner. So you can see that today we have discussed a number of very important common challenges. The United States and the European Union are not enough to tackle them, but without this transatlantic partnership there is no chance at all of having success in today’s global agenda. That’s why we really believe that it is very important to keep this relation alive and to keep it as strong as possible and to make it clear that it is more important than ever.

Thank you.

AMBASSADOR BRUTON: Thank you. President Barroso will now be happy to take questions. Sandi Auman has a microphone, if you wish to have its assistance, and before you pose your question, if you would be so kind as to indicate your name and the medium you represent.

Yes, sir?

Q: (Unintelligible) – NTV Television. Mr. President, was there any mention of Turkey in your talks with President Bush? And in the events Turkey’s bid for EU membership fails, are you concern that Turkey could become a loose cannon? Thank you.

MR. BARROSO: I raised the issue with President Bush of enlargement of the European Union, how successful the enlargement has been. It’s one of the greatest policies ever of the European Union. As you know, just now we have received two new members: Romania and Bulgaria. They are full members from the 1st of January from this year, and so we are now 27, almost 500 million people. It’s most important ever in the political and economic integration and it has been a success. So I informed and briefed President Bush of our next steps.

Turkey and Croatia are candidate countries and we are already negotiating with them, and I exposed to President Bush our wish to go further in those negotiations, of course, in the respect of all the criteria that we have decided to be – that have to be respected for a country to become a member. As I’ve said very often, it will be a difficult, a long process, but it’s a process in which we are very much engaged to have this negotiation with Turkey.

AMBASSADOR BRUTON: Yes?

Q: My name is Noah Smith (ph). I’m (with BNA ?). You mentioned in your briefing that you discussed with Bush this proposal that was an energy and climate change proposal that you were going to, I think – (inaudible). I wonder if you could give us a few more details on that, a bit of an overview, I think, to the – (inaudible) – mentioned a target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions at – (inaudible) – percent by 2020. I was wondering if you could confirm that and then tell us how that – how the proposal – propose going about achieving those reductions will be entirely – (inaudible) – greenhouse gas emissions trading program that is already operational, or if there will be additional measures outside of that, and to bring that back to your visit here where you discussed more concrete agreements you reached with Bush or – (inaudible).

MR. BARROSO: Well, I’m sorry that I cannot yet go into detail of the proposal because it is not yet adopted, and we have been working for several months on that, and that the final decision will be taken by the college – means the whole [European] Commission – meeting in Brussels the day after tomorrow. But it will be, I can say to you, a very comprehensive and ambitious set of proposals, not only about internal market for energy, because we are going to present some ideas to overcome the obstacles that exist till today to a real internal market for energy in Europe. Today, we have 27 markets for energy – not yet the real functioning open market in Europe and we want it to be like that, but also in terms of linking the issue of energy to the climate change, because they are in fact two faces of the same coin as well. Because when we speak today about climate change, it is about environment – defending our environment, leaving to the future generations a good environment, but it is also a question of energy security and it is also a very important economic and technological question and we have to operate in all areas.

So about the concrete targets, we are going to take a decision on Wednesday, but we believe it is important to have targets in terms of global emissions. Technology is important, of course, but precisely having clear, binding targets in terms of emissions, we believe in Europe this is important because this is precisely the way to create incentives for more innovation, to create also first mover advantage to give concrete incentive to companies and to Member States of the European Union to adapt to those new challenges.

That’s why we are very committed to the emissions trading scheme. And, in fact, recently the European Commission came with some decisions concerning the national allocation plans for some Member States – will come very soon for the other Member States of the European Union saying how much they can, in fact, have in the future.

And now, of course we are speaking about global warming, not only European warming. That’s why we very much want to engage Americans as close as possible in this matter. It will make a big difference if the United States are clearly as committed as we are. It will make a great difference because it is not just about us; it’s also trying to engage China, India, very important emerging economic partners. And so if the United States, that are doing some progress, can join us in that effort, we will be very – of course, welcoming that very much. And that will be a part of our regular summit during this German presidency.

Precisely, one of – I cannot anticipate the final decision I’m going to take on the proposals, but we are thinking about putting kind of a differentiated target. So what we can do on our own and what we can do if other developed countries join us, you see, as an incentive for them to go ahead also with Europe. So this, I believe it’s a crucial thing for the future of our planet. It’s maybe one of the most important challenges of the 21st century, if not most important one, and let me tell that I had a very good and open dialogue about this with President Bush and I’ve seen that this matter is making a real progress also in the public opinion in the United States and I really welcome that.

AMBASSADOR BRUTON: Thank you. Here.

Q: My name is – (inaudible) – Television. Mr. President, since you have been here the last time in Washington, there has been a radical political change in this city with the Democrats taking control of Congress and many calling the president a lame duck. I wonder what does that mean for your approach to the United States. Do you feel that you might have more chances to be heard – (inaudible) – questions where until now it was rather difficult?

And then the second question, if I may, when Saddam Hussein was hanged in Baghdad, the reactions in Europe and in America were completely different. The President here said it was a milestone towards democracy; the Commission said it was an act of barbarism. I wonder – has that the question of the -- (inaudible) -- would have been raised today? Is that part of the discussion between the Europeans and Americans? Thanks.

MR. BARROSO: First of all, about the internal situation in the United States, you know very well that in a democracy there are elections and sometimes elections bring different results, and let me tell that also in Europe we have had several changes, so that happens. And our relation is with the United States of America, a country that we very much respect, a very important nation, a great nation indeed, a nation that has basically the same values as our values, democratic values in terms of freedom, democracy and this is very important.

So I will make no point about the internal situation. But of course we are aware of the political situation in the United States. By the way, we met Senate Majority Leader Senator Reid, and the Speaker of the Congress, Mrs. Pelosi was, I’m told, the first time we have this opportunity – the President of the Commission – to meet both leaders at the same time. In a previous capacity, I met Mrs. Pelosi some years before when I was prime minister in my country when she was minority leader, so she really made progress. And we also had a very good, I’d say, meeting with Mrs. Pelosi and Senator Reid. But of course, our relations in terms of the negotiation are above all with the president and the administration.

Regarding – and I think about the future of the relations between Europe and the United States, I really believe that this is a shared priority, Administration and the Congress. What we have heard today coming from the leaders of the Congress was clear, their engagement, their personal engagement, political priority to a good relation with Europe. That’s what, of course, we were expecting and that is also the commitment that we have been receiving from all parties – all relevant parties in this great country.

Regarding the hanging of Saddam Hussein, you know what our position is. In fact, for us it is a question of principle. We are against death penalty. Saddam Hussein was a ruthless, brutal, cruel dictator. But we have a position of principle against the death penalty, and in fact we encourage everybody in the world to fight death penalty, that we believe it is against the principles of human dignity.

AMBASSADOR BRUTON: Yes?

Q: Hi. My name is Jamie Strawbridge from Inside US Trade. I want to go back to the transatlantic economic cooperation question. Both you and Chancellor Merkel have said that you’re interested in deepening this relationship and the chancellor has mentioned the possibility of establishing a working group to do so for issues such as investment and financial regulations. I wanted to ask how is what we’re seeing now – this desire to deepen and further this relationship and – through this working group – how is this different from what we’ve had previously under the US-EU economic initiative? We have a regulatory cooperation forum. We have specific working groups for issues like financial regulations. So I was hoping to understand what is going to be different now exactly and are there any reasons why we should look for more concrete results than we’ve been able to achieve the past few years? Thank you.

MR. BARROSO: I think the reason is the increased competitiveness and the need to improve our competitiveness in the age of globalization. As you rightly said, there are and in fact, in 2005 we adopted a European Union and United States economic initiative, and the European Commission for many years has been a strong advocate of a stronger and closer economic relation with the United States.

And as I said, we have the strongest economic link in the world: it’s between the United States and Europe. If you look at the figures, they are really impressive. I’m just – for preparing this meeting with President Bush, and mainly the last years have been a great, great progress. It’s amazing. When sometimes we would speak about China and India, there are some countries individually in European Union where the relation with the United States is much bigger than the relation of the United States with all China or all India. It’s really impressive to see this, so we are happy with that.

But now we felt, and I agree – Chancellor Merkel and myself – we thought that was the moment now to give a more comprehensive and structured approach to this, and that’s precisely what we are working on with our American partners, and so will send a mission very soon, advisers of Mrs. Merkel and myself come here, to see which way we can give a more structured approach to this economic partnership in terms not only in terms of trade – most issues of trade, of course, have to be seen in Doha, and we are committed to that multilateral approach, as I said earlier, but also in terms of regulatory convergence, where a lot of work has been going on and with very good success, but also in terms of including other sectors like energy in this global framework, aviation – this is not mentioned – it has not yet been mentioned, but I really believe it’s an important issue to put also in the global framework of our economic relations with the United States.

And so we hope that that group – that working group – will establish some priorities and that we will announce some progress in this matter in the regular European Union and United States summit that will take place this time in the United States in the first half of this year.

AMBASSADOR BRUTON: The gentleman in the front chair.

Q: Steven – (unintelligible) – with AFP. Coming back to the issue of climate change, you’re dealing with an administration that was criticized in its first term for even questioning the idea of global warming. Do you believe that there has been a change within the administration along with the change you mentioned in public opinion, and it’s now more serious about addressing the issue?

MR. BARROSO: Look, I just spoke today with President Bush, and we were speaking about climate change, so it means that we all agree that there is a problem. It is true that our American partners have put more emphasis on technology, and we welcome that. In fact, we are also investing a lot on technology. We have a good cooperation with the United States on that matter. We believe that this alone is not enough, that it is important to have global targets to cut emissions. And I saw in President Bush a very receptive interlocutor about those matters.

Of course, we know that American position so far has been and it is a position of not accepting Kyoto, so there is a difference. I don’t pretend we agree on that matter completely, but I want to underline the fact that today in the United States from my point of view, that have been discussing these issues for many years with our American partners, there is a growing awareness here about the need to push the agenda of energy efficiency, energy security, and global sustainability in terms of energy, and this is, of course, a good thing for all of us that want a cooperative approach to fight climate changes. As I’ve said before it’s not just about European warming, it’s global warming.

And so, my answer to you basically is, yes, I see a much more open attitude, a more engaging attitude regarding the need for common action globally on this matter. It does not mean – I want to be very honest and very objective in my report to you – it does not mean that we are exactly on the same line, but it means there is a broad, broad area of consensus in the need to achieve some progress in this very important area.

Q: Brian Berry from Euro Politics. Well, you said you discussed Iraq with President Bush, can you talk a little bit about that? You said that you were deeply concerned that the military question and the civilian questions could be separated. To date, Europe has – (unintelligible) – military side. Do you think that at some point that a new type of strategy from the European Union on Iraq is – (inaudible)?

MR. BARROSO: Look, it’s up to the President of the United States to communicate the policy that the United States are, of course, going to present on that matter. What I think, I have to underline on behalf of the European Commission for that purpose, on behalf of the European Union, is that there is a shared concern. The instability of Iraq is not in the interest of anyone reasonable in the world. It is of course in the interest of terrorists, it is in the interest of the enemies of freedom, the enemies of democracy. So as you know, this matter was also very divisive issue in Europe some years ago.

I can tell that nowadays, basically Europe is convergent on that issue. We understand the need to stabilization of Iraq. We are doing it from our side; namely, on aid. It’s true that some Member States are also in the security effort, but as European Union institutions – myself, we are here now representing the European Commission, we are exploring common views to support these efforts.

For us, it is important to engage others in the region so that we can reduce and hopefully put an end to sectarian violence inside Iraq. For us, it is important also to work in the economic and social aspects of the stability in Iraq, and that’s what we are doing, and we hope we’ll go on doing. President Bush conveys to us his confidence in a solution for that problem, and I’m grateful for the very open way in which he exposed to us his intentions regarding that very difficult situation.

AMBASSADOR BRUTON: Lady here.

Q: Hi. Missy Ryan from Reuters. I was hoping you could give us a few more details on the conversation about Doha; specifically, was there any agreement or other commitment on the US part on farm subsidies, around the European part on tariff barriers for agricultural products? Thank you.

MR. BARROSO: Look, at this moment or at least until some moments ago, the European Union Commissioner for Trade Peter Mandelson was meeting the United States Trade Representative Mrs. Susan Schwab. So we, President Bush and myself, we gave our confidence and our support to our negotiators to find an agreement, at least an agreement that we could also bring others on board. It’s not just about the United States and Europe and this is important to know. It’s also about the developing world. Some very important countries and emerging countries are also very active in this negotiation.

What we believe, of course, is that the part of solution has to come from agriculture in Europe, but also the United States, namely, domestic support. I’m not going to negotiate in public; I don’t think this is the proper way to do it. What I can say to you, is that in the meeting today there were unequivocal signals – unequivocal, very clear, very determined signals from President Bush that he wants a deal for Doha, and I also gave exactly the same signals: that we want a deal for Doha; that we should not miss this opportunity. It would be a real feather for the international community, and that the United States and Europe, of course, have a special responsibility in this matter.

And so I hope that our negotiators will make some progress and that they will also bring others in the same direction because, let’s not forget, this is not just about agriculture, this is also about opening the non-agricultural markets; namely, on services. This is also about respect for intellectual property rights, respect of rules. It’s a very huge, it’s a very complex negotiation. What we have today clearly defined was this sense of urgency and the need to come to an agreement and to some concessions; namely, on agriculture.

AMBASSADOR BRUTON: Over here.

Q: (Inaudible.) Mr. President, could you elaborate to what extent you talked about data exchange, data protection and the air traffic and visa waiver program concern not only for the Union member countries. There are rumors that the Commission was very concerned about the newly-published program of the US called Automatic Targeting System, that the US administration wants to link certain – (inaudible) – that European countries send over data before the flights through – (inaudible) – of the – (inaudible). What’s the position of the European Union? Do you think that European standards of data protection are there with respect to the United States?

MR. BARROSO: As you know, the current United States-European agreement on PNR – passenger name records – data will expire in July this year. The European Union is making ready to negotiate a new PNR agreement with the US. A new European Union-US agreement will help to build this transatlantic trust. Our common goals are clear: to protect our citizens’ security by making sure law enforcement authorities have the right information they need to do their work, while protecting our citizens’ fundamental rights and privacy. We believe in Europe that these goals are neither mutually inconsistent, nor impossible to reach. So it’s a question of having the right balance.

Security? Yes, we completely share the concerns of security and the need to fight terrorism, but at the same time to do it in a way that our societies keep the respect for fundamental rights and freedoms. If not, we would be no longer a free society, but other kind of society. So we should look at what our systems have in common rather than the differences. This is the purpose of the high-level contact group that has been set up to identify and develop European Union and US commonalities in the protection of personal data.

We want a common space with more sharing of relevant information, and at the same time more protection of personal data. And we believe this is that way to the future. And as you know, Vice President Frattini of the European Commission is very active engaging in contacts also with his American counterparts so that we can have a deal that respects those principles. This was not a matter today of our formal conversations, but of course we know about the interest that the American side also has in this very sensitive issue.

Q: I’m Neil Roland with Bloomberg News. Your Open Skies discussions with the US are due to restart this week. What do you think are the chances of success?

MR. BARROSO: We hope it will come to success. (You ?) are disappointed the fact that it could not come to a successful conclusion. We believe that it is an important part of our economic relation, and that’s why I mentioned earlier that in the future economic partnership, more structured aviation should be a part of it, at least from our point of view, because there are very important estimates about what it means in economic terms if we have a better aviation relation between United States and the European Union.

By the way, that’s also a matter where the European Commission, that matter of Vice President Barrot, is making a real effort and we very much ask our American counterparts to give the same contribution.

Q: I’m a freelancer. My name is – (unintelligible). I’m a freelancer. I’d like to ask you who is responsible for the climate changing? Europeans, which is circulating 20 million cars, trying to resolve problems pretty much – (unintelligible) – change, is not enough with the technology at all. In Alps (north of ?) – (unintelligible) – is raining, no longer is snow coming – sun. In United States, is 20 million car every day and 10,000 airplanes. This is the destruction (practically ?). Europe, there are treaty with Kyoto. You try to resolve problems with technology. It’s not enough. Is responsible this climate change all over the world? That’s my question for you, Mr. President.

MR. BARROSO: Yes, it is a global responsibility in fact. Of course, there are different levels of economic development, some economies are more intensive in energy than others, we know that, but we believe it’s a global responsibility. And it’s a real problem.

And we have to consider it in terms of the future generations. The need to leave this planet, our planet, to them in a condition they can live there. So it’s also, if you want, an ethical question – an ethical, a moral question, apart from all the other dimensions I’ve mentioned. And so irrespective of the different position of the Member States of the European Union, or of the other countries like United States and the levels of development, we believe that from an ethical point of view what makes sense is to recognize the problem and to give a contribution for fighting that threat to our future and to our life.

AMBASSADOR BRUTON: We have time for one last question. This gentleman with the glasses?

Q: Thank you. I’m Chuck Neidinger (ph) with Tax Analysts. Do all the Commissioners need to agree among themselves before proposing draft legislation for the EU Council? For instance, would all Commissioners need to agree on the proposal of Tax Commissioner Laszlo Kovacs to introduce a harmonized corporate tax base?

MR. BARROSO: I can argue everything about the decision-making of the Commission. It’s easy: the decision-making of the Commission is by majority. It’s a democratic body. But so far let me tell that in my Commission there was never a vote. We agreed so far everything by consensus.

By the way, if you are interested in the decision-making process in the Commission, I can call your attention to a very recent study of – (unintelligible) – Institut d’Etude des Sciences Politiques in Paris. It’s very interesting findings. They find that nowadays it’s easier to take decisions with the 25 members of the Commission than before when the Commission was smaller because precisely we have the European spirit and there are 25, now 27 with Bulgaria and Romania Commissioners.

But we come from different countries with different ideological backgrounds, sometimes with different training, but we want to have agreements. So usually what happens is a Commissioner responsible comes with this proposal, but there is a real collegial work. So to come forward, that proposal, and to be adopted afterwards by the Member States, it has to be of course backed by the whole Commission. If it is by unanimity or not, it depends. So the answer is any proposal to go forward on tax, yes, has to go to be adopted by the whole Commission, which does not necessarily mean unanimity.

But on the tax matter, that I understand it’s your concern, let me tell that our opinion in European Union by law in European Commission is not in favor of strict harmonization. We are not in favor of a single corporate tax rate. In fact, we believe it will be impossible to get it, at least in the foreseeable future. So no one is really moving that. What we believe we can do and we should do is to have some kind of, first of all, cooperation on tax matters; namely, against fraud, and also, if possible, to make the life of enterprises easier, yes, by not a common base, but not rates. So it’s an important difference.

So we are working – Commissioner Kovacs, that you have mentioned, and his services, is working in fact in some kind of, let’s say, convergence in European tax systems; namely, on the base. But that does not mean harmonization of our system because it will not be acceptable in Europe. In fact, some kind of competitiveness between different fiscal systems is considered a positive thing in Europe nowadays.

AMBASSADOR BRUTON: Thank you all very much.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE WASHINGTON MEETINGS, CLICK HERE.