>> another look at the coach. ♪ ♪

♪ >> the interior, lots of little inlaid pieces of wood, highly polished. they represent a thousand years of british house of commonwealth tradition. to signal the queen is leaving the palace the royal flag is being lowered. the union flag is back in place above the palace at westminster. the queen is ready to leave.

the coach is leaving. and once again, we have a rather splendid view of the queen's departure. and there we have it. although it is rather a rather dull day, a little wet, everything is glistening, gleaming. ♪ ♪

♪ >> national anthem played by the welsh national guard. they have a very busy day on thursday meeting lots of veterans in normandy. they will then be taking part in the big events on friday. there's a big international event in the afternoon involving lots of heads of state from around the world.

very emotional event, but that's the makeup of friday. and we are expecting the duchess of cambridge to be presiding at that final ceremony friday. this is the irish coach which i believe was bought by queen victoria around 1852. so for 700 pounds, which seems quite reasonable today, i don't think we're putting a value on it today. go back into the palace.

back into the floor gallery. we will see the reverse process taking place, the crown that was remade in 1937, adjusted again in 1953 for the coronation for the queen. this is the one on display, of course. the prime the item on display, and it's being taken down to the proper entrance. ♪ ♪ this is the final part of the ceremony, if you like, because once the crown has left, the

formal part of this state opening will be complete. the first stage, and now we have the lord chambers office. so first, the sword of state. and then to be followed by -- there on the right.

safely inside. and then the crown jewel or will stand by with the barge master there to make sure that the crown is safely placed inside the coach. the crown jewel or since 2012.

rather called because of course without the main recessions. what do the recent elections tell us about the state of public opinion on europe? and are we likely to see that translate into real policies? obviously there's a hint of something they're in the queen's speech but what over likely to see in real terms? >> what recent elections those is the level of discontent. in the sentiment of all parties about what happened to the european union. principally following the crisis in the euro because not a crisis i was ever remotely in favor of, but what is interesting is that in many countries in europe

you've got parties which are explicitly anti-eu. but they're a big debate taking place including in germany about what the recalculation of power which is a necessary. so i think in this country there was a broad consensus about what needs to be done. we want to make sure we build our allies. one of my concerns with david cameron operating, for example, who should be president of the commission. i sure significant reservations about jean-claude, let me tell you, luxembourg has not had a particularly honorable role. all sorts of reservations about him but you got to build alliances. >> how important is your commitment to a referendum? >> i would've liked to seen in the queen's speech. we don't have coalition agreement on it, that's why we been trying conservative party did everything we can through bills to try to get that referendum commitment through. it would have been great if that

was in the queens beach but as it's about possible but something as a party we are committed to because what those elections data shows is that there's significant discontent with britain's relationship to europe. there is a general feeling that too many powers of got to come back. that is our view. were i respect we disagree with jack because i don't think there is consensus on this. both liberal democrats and labour party, they're happy with the status quo. they have suggestion for a more particular europe and you cannot get our renegotiation if that's what you truly believe without having in and out of referendum. >> i'm shaking my head because lip democrats are in favor of reform in the eu level. that whole thing is got to be change. we've already legislate of the coalition government so that the be a referendum if there was any significant transfer of powers from the uk, to the european union. i think what the argument is

about is how can we achieve reform, what is the most effective way of doing that? is it by sniping from the sidelines or by getting stuck in trying to build allies, as jack said, trying to achieve reform from within the european union? >> we will pause for a second but i'm going to join the queue once again. -- vicky once again. >> dates back to 16 thirds and it's been held for the last three years by sir robert rogers is retiring this year. tell me what it is like to take part in this ceremony? >> a fantastic experience. also reminds the queen and parliament is, there are three parts of parliament. it's also a different contrast because we had a fantastic ceremonial this one. this afternoon the house resumes and there is quite, the bible,

underlines the fact it is the right of the, and to proceed with business regardless of what they may need to do after the queen's speech. but that's the framework in the morning and then the hurly-burly in the afternoon is a great contrast but as part of our parliamentary. >> there are thousands of people who work here. you were in charge of what, 2000 people? >> 2000 in the house of commons, yes, with a fantastic range, skills and experiences because we provide all of the services that the house needs to conduct its business. so everything that experts from the woodwork, not directly but y the houses business but it is about maintaining the incredible building in which we operate. right across the board the economic research experts, select committees, the people who provide come hell provide

our security. it's a remarkable group of people. i'm very proud to have led them for the last three years. >> and your retiring this year. >> the first of august, yes. >> favorite memories of? >> whether it's the vote of 1979 or great speeches or moments where the vote on syria only a few months ago where the role of the comments on the became a lot more important. >> thank you very much. great memories there, and i told you what -- the legal owner of big been. >> having read his biography i'm told he actually can speak a bit of medieval welsh, and my book. a quick a sense more because what reaching the end of the coverage. what will they be concentrating

on? what is the theme going to be? >> or the liberal democrats and will be about building a stronger economy. that's why we saw in the queen's speech and emphasis on jobs in the private sector, why we saw matters pertaining to apprenticeships in a fair society s so that's where we're investing childcare, building on what we've already achieved in relation to things like the premium. >> these are coalition priorities and it means we need to continue this long-term plan we've got for the country. this is where a continuation of that will be heard today. you can keep build a stronger economy but it also shows the still a lot more work to be done. >> jack, your thoughts? >> the big issue will be about fairness. what i thought was interesting what ed miliband has been saying, energy prices over what you do for low pay, you provide greater security. those of the big engagements along with this issue of housing as well. it's good record but not enough

performers from the government. >> there is no piece of legislature that will comment the election. even the unexpected, and troublesome, frankly will be on the campaign to. nothing we heard today will change the electoral map of britain. >> nice to have your company. thank you very much. more on the bbc news channel throughout the day from all the team at a spinster, thanks for watching, and goodbye. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> and as the server comes to close the quicker that if you

missed any of today's state open you can watch it anytime after website. go to c-span.org, check the c-span video library. we will have highlights from the state opening this coming sunday at 9 p.m. eastern on c-span. also british prime ministers question time resumes next wednesday at 7 a.m. eastern but you can watch it live here and see spent you as prime minister david cameron takes questions from members of the house of british comments. at 11 members will vote. senators will also vote on the confirmation of several judicial nominees. watch live senate coverage coming up at 9:30 eastern here on c-span2. on c-span, a senate banking subcommittee will examine the impact of student loans are having on bar was in the economy. according to consumer financial protection bureau, student loan debt is nearing a trillion dollar. live coverage gets underway at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span.

>> on a lonely windswept point on the northern shore of france, and the air is soft but 40 years ago at this moment the air was dense with smoke and the cries of men and the air was filled with the crack of rifle fire and the roar of cannon. at dawn on the morning of the sixth of june, 1944, 225 rangers jumped off the british landing craft and ran to the bottom of these cliffs. their mission was one of the most difficult and daring of the invasion, to climb these sheer and desolate cliffs and take out the enemy guns. the allies had been told that some of the mightiest of these guns were here and there would be trained on the beaches to stop the allied advance. the rangers looked up and saw the enemy soldiers, the edge of the clip shooting down at him with machine guns and throwing grenades. and the american rangers began to climb. >> this weekend, american

history tv will mark the 70th anniversary of the d-day invasion of normandy starting saturday morning at 10:30 a.m. eastern watch this year's commemoration for the world war ii memorial in washington. that's followed by craig simons who will discuss his new book, neptune. at 1230, he will take your questions and comments life. at 1:30 p.m. and look back at presidential speeches converting the day all on american history tv saturday on c-span3. >> in recent election, and the european union parties made gains in the european parliament especially among voters in britain, france and germany. the brookings institution hosted a discussion about the election results and waiting for the future of the eu. this is about one hour 45 minutes. >> all right. we'll start. thank you so much all of you for being here. despite the rain which kind of

threat and for a little while but has almost stopped. it's really wonderful to have all of you here, and i think we'll have a very lively and interesting discussion. thanks to a truly fantastic panel. i'm so grateful you agree to join us. and the timing is pretty good, you know, about a little more than a week after the european parliamentary elections in the middle of this debate that is interrupted from the presidency of the commission and many other topics to cover. we have and the baltimore who has the global conversation for your news. she came all the way from london yesterday. [inaudible] >> europe. i'm sorry. from paris, that's right, i'm sorry. i made a mistake. and isabelle, for those of you who watched her but maybe not everybody has had a chance to, moderated the first european

presidential debate. although as i said i know others may say what came out of president debate? let's call it presidential in jordan and, of course, we will discuss why that is. and i watched it and i was really impressed by the moderation. so we invited her and she was gracious to accept. reza moghadam, many of you know his the director for the europe at the imf. he was before that the director for the strategy and policy department. i don't think i exaggerate in any way in saying that he is one of the top economists in the world, top people at the imf. and there are few people i think who have as deep a knowledge about the european economy and the challenges ahead for europe than reza. i had the pleasure and sometimes the tough time to negotiate with him when he was chief of mission for the imf and i was on the

research side, but that was quite some time ago. there's my coeditor, jacques mistral. we have her book out there for those who want to get it later on. it's out in front of the door. jacques is a french economist, a nonresident senior fellow at brookings. he's very modest so i kept arguing with them what i could put in terms of description on the handouts. he was senior advisor to the reformist french prime minister, chief economist, both private sector and public sector experience. and he's one of the key organizers of the annual economists meeting which meets every year and brings together economists from around the world. then we have two very dear

friends, the ambassador of ireland and the ambassador of the united kingdom. and anderson, you know, i didn't check on everything the position she has had, but she seems to gotten all the important positions in life. among them of course ambassador to france. but, of course, to brussels, to the eu or she is extreme and knowledgeable about the eu affairs. and to the u.n., to come to global affairs and out of washington, and she reminded me that she also negotiated much more recently on the irish program, but that was when the island was already doing pretty well. and sir peter john westmacott, because the ambassador in france, in turkey where we became friends, now in washington. again, i don't think i can exaggerate what a top figure of british and european diplomacy, and really also a different. thanks for being here, peter.

i attempt to hire some of his staff when i lose people. i draw on the british embassy. so thanks a lot for being here. i think the degree to which the debate has erupted over who should lead the commission president, is somewhat surprising to a lot of people. i mean, we knew there would be debate, some horse trading, some negotiation, but i think it has become very serious. and so i think this will be one of the topics we have to address. not just in itself. i don't think the debate is all about the personality of jean-claude was a lot of express for sure but some say it's a little bit presenting the past of europe, not necessary the future. but there is a whole current of thought and belief now that you

cannot have an eu election like we had. cannot have isabelle moderating people asked what she thinks about community, in the first ever really historical poll -- sorry, beyond borders local debate. i don't think there ever has been a debate like that. and then somebody wins and then you say well, you know, that's very nice, kind of entertaining but now let's get back to the series business and choose the candidate to be the country. it's going to be difficult but i don't know what will happen in the end but i think there's a strong and if you that this shouldn't be the case and that the election shouldn't be taken since the. and one final to that is that all the center parties kind of mainstream party, not the popular of the stream right -- or extreme right, the central

left, the greens have already laid behind jean-claude juncker. that's not just the center-right, it's a whole moderate spectrum. maybe not that brown but i don't know, we will find out. from the center of american progress. he's another one of the leading, no, people debating this in europe. so on the other hand, there is a few that, and that was expressed today in the financial times. i would just reach out to you very briefly. it is above all a nation with a sheer ties of life which can history and political culture that democracy can live and breathe. at a european level you cannot replicate the forms of democracy elections, political parties and so on, so you can replicate the forms of democracy, but we cannot create the underlying the

most, the people needed to bind the democracy together. then he rubs it didn't even for the. that is why you end up with the absurd situation in which they have chosen a leader in which they've never do. so you see there are really two very, very different positions, and i think this is one of the really key topics ahead of us for the european institution. i think behind that there's also the whole issue of the future of the euro zone. and, of course, as an economist and director of the global economic and development program, we are very interested in that. there is the view among most economists, i think most because i know that i interact with believe and a lot of u.s. economist with believe that you can't have this happen with a much further degree of fiscal policy, banking you know, banking supervision therefore not necessary political

federalism but something that comes quite close to a pretty high degree of political federalism, if you want to have -- of course not all of europe is amongst the union but if that is true, can you achieve that coordination at the technical economic policy level without having the corresponding democratic state. and i think a lot of the debate revolves around the. not everybody agrees that you need that degree of policy coordination and to help transform we'll see how much policy corniche is needed but i will say a large majority of economists do believe it. there are some political consequences, which are hard to face but which don't go away. and i think that perhaps is the deeper dimension of the debate we are experiencing around the head of the commission. so with that, let me turn to and

anderson first. anne, what lessons do you take from the elections, how do you look at the path forward, european institution, anything you want to share with us as a part and it will have an interaction discussion but if you have to if you have to focus on two or three main points, what will they be? >> okay, country, thank you for the very challenging introduction. certainly has been very sobering election, no question about that. maybe to make a few points about the outcome. firstly, i think the participation rates were disappointing in line with previous participation but still when you 43% voting, 57% of people staying at home, that points to a certain disconnect and apathy, which is of course a concern. secondly, i think we can't forget that anyway there were 28 separate messages, because with

28 member states and as you always find and european elections people are addressing the national government at least as much as they're sending a message to brussels. but thirdly, editing quick to recognize this in so far as their was a european wide message, obviously what all the headlines are focused on is the 30% of the vote that went to the eurosceptics and populist parties and candidates. i think there always has to be concerns when a climate is created in which extreme views are taking more of the space. so i think that certainly is food for very serious thoughts. another point i would make is in terms of how it's looked at him across the atlantic year. i think there's no question that

europe is still going to be very much a strong function partner for the united states, worries about -- are out of place but i do think there's something important to be said about the message that came from this 30%. because it's something went to face together in europe and in the united states because fundamentally i think this is a message about fear of globalization, and that there is really no question but that community, europe is not the enemy. europe is really not the target to europe is a lightning rod for a lot of this discontent. people feel buffered by globalization and they feel they are at the mercy of forces that they can't control. and, obviously, the united states is not immune to that either. and you see the way those concerns are playing out among sectors of the population here. so i think it's something that's

important transatlantic link that we take account of. i think in terms of what is going to mean in europe and it's clear that the leaders have already said this can be business as usual come we're going to see some policy adjustments. this is been really about the economy and about growth and jobs, about austerity fatigue. and european leaders are going to be taken into account and, of course, the challenge is how do you keep the necessary system disciplines and at the same time at least soften the edges of austerity? i think there will be issues about the way we possibly do and how we do it in business -- in europe. more relevance, less red tape. and i think that question that's been around for so long about how do we communicate europe to our citizens, that message comes into even sharper focus. in terms of what happens in the

institutions, let's see how things play out in the european parliament. this 30% of the populist eurosceptic vote, if i can shorthand it that way, is actually a very fractured vote, between right and left. you see the difficulties the right our to having in trying to great alliances between themselves. 70% will certainly be incentivized to work even more closely together. so let's wait to see just what impact this 30% as. in terms of, i will finish with this, the question that you raised about the president of the commission, i'm not going to get into individuals and personalities. the arguments as you lay them out, they're on both sides. but i do think that this result is going to make the european leaders look ultimately even more carefully at the qualities that they're going to require,

whoever takes over this key role, who is going to be able to implement the kind of policies that are going to be there, who is going to be able to articulate a vision that has residents for people in europe, who is the skilled communicator which we clearly need. so i think in the ultimate decision we are going to see people looking at those questions again and seeing who best fits of those boxes. >> we hope you are right on the last one, so afford to isabelle, you moderated that debate in the heart of europe, and on the debate, how did you live it? i think and what impact did it have on your perception and how did you follow the campaign? was it an important campaign or was it just a campaign restricted to a very small minority of european citizens to? i think as anne said, there are

20 different campaigns going on so it was quite difficult to follow all those campaigns. the ones that grab most people's attention was a campaign in france and one in britain. where everybody was expected to make such a big gains and they did. in terms of the debate, the debate was terribly exciting and intense and i think those two would've never been used together to describe the european election because for the first time where these candidates in front of you representing europe. and they had to make their case for europe, but they also to make himself known and are starting point women had the debate wasn't let's try and kind of geek out more difficult if they've got because many respects these guys are very similar but it was more know what he knows who the hell they are, you know? its try to present them to our viewers that the people can identify who jean-claude juncker, who martin schultz is, scott kelly, i don't think anyone ever heard of scott

keller. so that's what was very exciting about this. it also was brought home some to the really many europeans don't know who they are. it comes back to what anne the sink and 43.1% of the electorate voted. so as it turns i found it very exciting. i think generally people have been quite apathetic about europe. so, therefore, even though we have this great, this interesting backdrop and if your skepticism, yet economy in so much trouble, people could be bothered to vote. so the debates were great. to the fire of interest talks the jury is out on that one. and so i think the contest was probably followed more closely in the european election. >> thank you. but just as a matter of statistics. the u.s. congressional election to both the presidential you and

the author average about the same. the year when there's not a presidential election actually participation in u.s. congress is less. so was a 43% is not very impressive, you know -- >> but this will be different. you have to judge itself by the lowest common denominator but if you're setting the target high, surely you want to kind of beat your past result by more than .1%, special we have these kind of candidates standing there. spent i agree. i would be very careful before i debate you. >> but also the race in national elections in europe are much higher than the election-year. >> it is a more politicized society to some degree. jacques, i come back to all of you later, particularly on the economic side, but bringing the topic on board to the economic

side. europe, after all, has gone through a very cities, not all countries have gone through tracers crisis, although even germany in 2009 had a negative 5% growth rate. but is there now and economic recovery? how is the economic receipt and how can you link the economic argument to the debate? >> thank you. in effect, eurozone went through a crisis for two years. the critical question that has made for too long the euro breakdown possible, possibility, was if i may say as simple as that. the eurozone member countries pashtun are the eurozone member country wan when to stick togetr at all price? at all price. that's a politically terrifying question. that it took two years of

intensive political debates to offer a credible and positive energy. the european council confirmed anonymous -- unanimous, design policy and institutional changes to make it properly function in the future. ecb president mario draghi, as you know, later translated this political decision into intelligible -- whatever it takes. the eurozone is now out of the financial danger zone and is moving towards a stronger integration. the results will not be perfect but my guess is that it will work. on the other side, the crisis, unemployment has skyrocketed in the south and social conditions

have deteriorated. and the european elections, unsurprisingly, are proof of many frustrations. but frustrations against what? against excesses immigration? possibly. against holland and france? certainly. against austerity increased? definitely. [inaudible] but interestingly enough, two-thirds of the population everywhere want to keep the euro. two-thirds increase, in spain, and france and in germany, among others. now, what is the political answer to these political feelings? first, the newly elected european parliament is no

expression of the eurosceptic union. on the contrary. euro critics will have a louder voice in brussels, okay, but they are decided -- divided, and let me be blunt about it clear, they will prove much less expert and show than, say, a key part in washington. but more importantly, my view is -- democratic exercise, we are witnessing about the choice of the president of the commission. the pro-european party has unanimously agreed on the name of the parliament candidate, mr. juncker. this approach has been explicitly sought. it would appear close to electoral fraud from mr. shultz. my guess is that the and the

parliament, and we will -- sunday this will prove a watershed in european politics. in brussels, a wide pro-european majority, and these parliament with exercise fractions to offer more integrated eurozone that is definitely needed. the pro-european parties from the center-right, from the centerleft, the greens and the liberals represent the diversity of european constituencies. and they should work across the aisle, like in washington in the past. and not live as it has been for some time, not in an explicit coalition like in germany. this strategy would raise hopes with perception of a cartel which runs the eu to the

detriment of many europeans. and that we decided late -- your septic narrative on the issues between the elites and the people. finally, political debate in brussels, pragmatic responses, the challenges facing the union and member states, mostly unemployment and protection. the major goal is to combine -- [inaudible] and to design growth oriented policies. daunting challenges of the views from brussels are quicker to the eurozone is moving forward. >> thank you, jacques. that was a very optimistic and forceful message. i do want to share with you that even i was sometimes worried. i didn't believe it would happen, mainly for political reasons, but while i would say a

large majority of professional opinion in washington was convinced that greece would exit the euro, jacques steadfastly figured that it would not, such as want to put that on record. reza, you are responsible for a lot of this stuff. director of the imf europe department. can you tell us just a few words of the economy out in particular, how do you link this populist, you know, yet it's not a majority by 3% is a large vote. how much of it is economic distress, unemployment? and also, you know, deflation, the european inflation target is 2% or just below. it's now running at less than half. all hell would break loose if inflation was 3.5%, right? i mean, think about it. the buddy would be -- it's below

1%, almost getting close to zero, and nothing seems to be happening. >> thanks, kemal, for the very kind introduction. before i, too the story, let me just indoors what you implicitly and jacques explicitly mentioned, that turnaround incentives, market sentiments in particular over the last two years is really remarkable. and i would add one other dimension again to add perspective. if you look at the european project as an economic integration and economic performance project over the last 50 years, there is considerable success. i think it's a major success story, particularly this year is the 10th anniversary of the new member states joining the european union.

it's the 25th anniversary of the fall of berlin wall. and if you take the perspective of integrating particularly eastern europe or raising living standards in whole europe over the past 50 years, i think the european story is a major global success. but having said that, let me now come to my normal job. i think the challenge, what you mentioned, the relationship between economic distress and what you see in opinion polls and what is translated into election results is very striking usually. and at the heart of it at the moment is the challenge of jobs and growth, what anne mentioned earlier. i think that is at the heart of the problems faced by europe, and the unacceptable high levels of unemployment. the question is i think moving forward how to address that

because from a political social perspective, i think it is again remarkable over the last three years, four years of economic stress that we have seen a lot of hardship, we've not seen this sort of social strife that we see, for instance, in the emerging market crisis or earlier episodes of crisis in the world. but the sustainability of that requires job creation but it requires reducing unemployment. and what jacques mentioned earlier, european economies, many of them, have very high debt. and as you mentioned, inflation is incredibly low. when inflation is low it is difficult to bring debt down. when debt is high, growth suffers. and so i think the number one challenge, this issue of growth and inflation are related. in short, term support or through economic policies to

increase growth in the short run. there's also a long run problem. i will come back to that. but i think we've been advocating that there is need for supportive micro policies. given the high level of debt, fiscal policy at least has to do no harm. and from this year onwards, the stance of fiscal policy in europe is neutral. so a big burden is on monetary policy, and i think our view has been there is room for conventional and unconventional monetary policies in europe, and, indeed, necessary to create the room for reforms that increase potential growth. we need short-term growth to come back to provide that space. so we think there is that need. it is encouraging that the cbs talking about action this week, and one hopes that -- >> meeting on thursday, right?

>> meeting on thursday. they're talking they will act and in light of the recent growth and inflation numbers, it is necessary to act. but there's also a long-term issue. we calculate that right now potential output, what the european economies are capable of growing on average in the eurozone is only half of a percent. half of a person that is hardly adequate to stabilize, let alone reduce unemployment. that rate of growth needs to be brought up. and that requires and this is where the election results are a complication, one fears that they may stand in the way of needed reform, particularly labor and product to market reform. but on the other hand, it is necessary for the growth to come back, to undertake those reforms. i would also say there are two other areas where it's necessary

at a european level to move. in the u.s., as many of you know, the reliance on bank credit is much lower than it is in europe. in europe, the capital markets are not as much developed. corporate really good to the capital markets began to rely on the banking system. the banking systems are weak. credit is still falling. so developing capital markets in europe i think is an urgent task to increase the availability of credit and potential growth in the long run. and the other point i want to say is an issue we are currently discussing with our european colleagues in the context of our angel consultation, is that the current fiscal framework in europe, the governance of it, is worth looking at. the current fiscal framework is based on a framework which is based on targets for deficits,

targets for structural deficits. but when you have different levels of deaths across europe, some very high debt, some lower debt, the same kind of target do not make sense. and as i told you at the beginning, given that debt is at the heart of the debt overhang, not just the public sector but also private sector, you need to have mechanisms that look at debt and how to bring them down rather than simply on the fiscal bottom line. >> stocks complimenting, right? peter, your take on the latest events, and let me ask you a more pointed question. i remember david cameron's very important speech which was in january, europe's speech which he originally wanted to give i think in the netherlands but ended up giving in london, the

speech was way did indicate a very strong view on his perspective in europe. and one thing i was almost surprised by in that speech was the emphasis he put as a british prime minister on the need for the eurozone to coordinate further in order to manage the euro. as opposed to the switch by mr., finance mr. who a few weeks later said the opposite, saying that, in fact, the eurozone integrated for the that music could be the end of the european union. that was not at all the british prime ministers of you on the eurozone. at the same time, it's quite clear that the uk will not join the eurozone in the foreseeable future, and that the british prime minister as well as the british political leadership as a whole, although not everybody, is quite fiercely opposed to

further federalization or political integration in europe. so when you take these two things, on the one hand yes, the eurozone has to integrate more and we've heard both i think reza and jacques putting forward arguments in that direction, with the statement that, of course, the uk will never be part of that. what does it mean for the future of europe and for the future of europe where a commune, the uk is part of it, and for many of the reasons i think so many good reasons for why should be part of it. but on that particular point, how are these two statements compatible? >> thank you, kemal, for nice easy questions. thanks for giving me the chance to join your panel. i won't cover all the stuff that anne said, which i entirely agree about the consequence of elections and what it means about the state of europe. i just perhaps will underline a couple of points. first of all i think the rise of

your skeptic parties in a number of countries, not least my but also france, greece and the number of others, is a very significant development. there is one sense in which this is a traditional kind of protest vote. you would only expect that at a time when the economies are struggling to recover from a recession as well. but also conveys a broader message and as david cameron, mike preminger said just before the last council, we can't to shrug off these results. entry on as if nothing had happened with the to focus on what this means. we need a new approach which recognize that europe is defective in addressing the needs of people, of electors and it's got to focus a bit more on jobs and growth in making the european union work better. it wasn't only david cameron to reach that conclusion to the president of france for example, so that your opinion had become,

europe has become unreadable, distant, income principle, even for member states. this can't go on. he made a point which david cameron has made on a number of occasions about what we call, i'll find a message to do what they should be doing. president hollande also that we need europe to be simple and clear, to be effective where it is expected to be a with software is what it is not necessary. and i think that is an indication or so of the sword of reactions that the was almost political leaders. the italian prime minister says the answer is better europe, not more europe, and that is the reaction to these elections. so i think it's a bit of a wakeup call for a number of european governments, and it is an indication that europe needs to prepare itself better for the future, to be more responsive,

more democratically accountable, more flexible, more focus on competitiveness, doing the job better rather than just sticking with what many people would regard that as a somewhat out of date the federalist integrationist agenda. that i think is the attitude which conditions survey the attitude of my government towards the appointment the need to be made in the coming months for the future leaders of european union institutions. we need people focus on the future comprised to the challenge and make europe better, respond to public opinion rather than if you like stuck in the past and business as usual. your second question, how do we reconcile these two different messages which come from uk? they are not entirely consiste consistent. you know, i think there were two points the prime minister is making their first of all we have as much interest in the eurozone succeeding as any member of the eurozone, of the

currency union. we may not be a member of the. we decided we do not wish to be a member of the currency union, along with another 10 or 11 member states. at half of the united kingdom foreign trade is with other members of the eurozone, about 60% it with other members of the european union. we needed to succeed. they give us no satisfaction at all except when we're dealing with people who tells we've done everything wrong to th the growh rate this year of 3.1% according to the i met her as the average is down at 1.2, 1.3 and unemployment rates are a great deal higher for members of the eurozone. we have every interest in eurozone solving its problems and getting on with it. we recognize if you're going to do with the problems that come with having a pretty union but without having fiscal monetary union, that the eurozone needs to be strengthened and will give our support to that in whatever way that needs to be done. that's where the prime minister -- doesn't mean to say that we're going to join tomorrow. the united kingdom is not likely

to join the eurozone tomorrow. we have to continue dealing with our own economic difficulties like everybody else has to. we dropped a very deep. we went into a deep hole. our annual deficit, public finances went down to almost 12%. we feel that it's going in the right direction. deficit is down, unemployment at a record low. more people at work than ever before. and with growth rates which are much better than the average. but it is still fragile and we want to move ahead with it. we attach enormous importance to european union continued to reform itself, becoming more competitive so it is a more attractive place for foreign direct investment so that our enterprises are better able to

compete in the world economy. all that relates to the need, not just to the eurozone. we want it to succeed. we support it anyway we can we need to. if that means changing the rules of the game, strengthened the eurozone, that's fine but as but equally not least because we are part of it. >> excellent. i must say very impressive statement. thank you, judy but that was very articulate and i think that in many ways, many of us who hope for a strong european union also with a partner of u.s. and that vision if it works would be great. just two more things and then we will open it to the floor. if anybody wants to say something about the u.s., eu relationship in a broader context, i mean of course, anne you mentioned it but will it be

harder, to what degree will be harder? and the other thing i wanted to ask, if there was one person who came out hugely successful from these elections it's the italian prime minister. you know, his party i think is not going to have the second largest group in the european parliament. nobody has had that kind of percentage victory for decades. and the center-right opposition from the difference in percentage point, 25 percentage point difference. and he gives the message in jeans and shirts that, you know, peter, you quoted a part of it by saying better europe, not ms. fischer mordecai also said less austerity but more reform. so any comments? because it is an extraordinary i

think victory. how long lasting it will be we will see, but i don't think one can comment on the last few weeks without noting this really very impress the performance of a young centerleft politician, and i'm sure that jacques, i don't know what you think. >> well, we see the benefits of having a prime minister like matteo renzi with vision, with decisiveness, and that brings votes on election day. in france, probably the political situation during the last years of president hollande was on the opposite track. he was able to reverse the movement through -- i don't think so, because in order to allow the president to remain the boss. what can happen is when and if

he was able to thank some personal, sketch the political director like matteo renzi, that's not invisible. in that case he becomes indispensable to the president and he gets much more power by threatening to resign. because this would mean the end of this presidency. so we are in this position. we don't know because it will be two months. there's overdue one electoral to feed. so we will see. ..