Andrew Marr Interviews Emmanuel Macron

I am here at Government House at the

Royal military Academy outside of

London with the French president,

Emmanuel Macron, has just been

holding talks with the British

Minister Theresa May about defence

and immigration, of course, in the

context of Brexit. After those talks

were over, I sat down with Emmanuel

Macron to discuss those issues, but

also friends's role in the wider

world with China and, of course,

with President Donald Trump.

Mr President, we're sitting here at

centres at the heart of British

military culture and to have just

come to a military agreement. Can I

start by asking you what you agreed

with Theresa May?

We agreed with a

series of cooperation. Cooperation

with

series of cooperation. Cooperation

with

series of cooperation. Cooperation

with

series of cooperation. Cooperation

with

series of cooperation. Cooperation

with future projects. New capacities

for new weapons in the future which

represents very huge investments. It

is very much important because we

have a relationship in terms

defence. The Russians are teaming up

a new weapons all the time and there

is a different east or what's?

Not to sit up and use. We have a

series of security issues.

Obviously, we have security issues

coming from the east, but we have to

do with the Middle East

as in

Africa, the war against terrorism.

In terms of capacities, and a series

of new weapons, that is for a much

important promised strategic and

personal point of view. We decided

on our side to commit ourselves in

2019 for cooperation in Estonia. In

the framework of Nato. That is a

series of very concrete cooperation

on the short run because we have the

same vision of security and

collective...

Let me ask about the

wider picture. Do you think it's

possible Theresa May's words for

Britain to have a deep and special

relationship with the European Union

after Brexit?

I do hope. I think it

will be good for the EU and for the

UK.

She said a deep relationship. If

the UK... I imagine your if the UK

is going to be a member of the

customs union with a market or

except the four freedoms, he can't

be that deep.

It will beat by

definition lest deep. It will be by

definition must defend today because

the deepest possible -- last deep

down today because the deepest

possible... Got to be fair with

people. As he decided to leave, you

cannot be part of the single market.

In punch and of the nature of the

negotiation, you can have some

deeper relations than others. We

have a deeper relation with Norway

than the one we have with Canada. It

depends on the outcome of the

negotiation, but for sure, except if

you change your mind, you will not

be part of the single market as you

will not be part of the European

Union.

In concrete terms, let's talk

about what that might mean. For

instance, there are a lot of people

in this country who say not much of

the British economy is directly

trading with the EU. That's could

diverge, but bits of the British

economy that are related to be you

could converge. We have a

sophisticated bespoke a deal for

Britain. He said in the past you

could have Canada or you can have

Norway, but you can't have your own

special deal. Is that really fair

given how long Britain has been part

of the EU?

Is not a question of

being fair or unfair. It's about

having own solution.

There will

because the spokes muscles solution

for Britain.

I think there are two

images. This special way should be

consistent with the preservation of

the single market and our collective

interest. You should understand that

you cannot, by definition, a full

access to the single market if you

don't take the box. To get full

access to the single market, unique

contribution to the budget and you

do have to accept...

The freedoms.

The freedoms and the jurisdiction.

When you decide not to join the

preconditions, Stoffel access. So it

is something perhaps between the

full access and trade agreement, but

what is important is not to make

people think or believe that it is

possible to have...

Your cake and

eat it. When I talked to David

Davis, I ask what does Britain need?

He says Canada, plus, plus, plus. By

plus, plus, plus, he needs services.

From which you have so today, I

guess that you believe we can have

any special deal involving the city.

You know to speak about services,

but you speak of financial services.

Cooking the deal is the job of

Michel Barnier. We have very

dedicated organisation. I don't want

to start a negotiation against my

country. That would be ridiculous.

But we have to do and what we will

do would be to make a decision in

March regarding the mandate we want

to get to Michelle Barnier to

negotiate. After which he will have

to negotiate with your negotiator.

They will decide in independent

puzzles me by the UK, but for sure,

full access for financial services

to the single market is not feasible

getting the functioning of the

single market. By definition, it is

a pole axes.

In concrete terms, some

former passport he deal is off the

table in these negotiations as far

as you're controlled?

I'm not the

one to negotiate good one cause...

Depends on what you are ready to put

on the table in terms of

precondition. If you respect the

precondition to get access to the

single market, it is feasible. It is

not cherry picking in the single

market. If I have to wrap up of full

philosophy, not cherry picking in

the supermarket because it is not

feasible because otherwise, that is

that this dismantling of the single

market and for me, it is one of

the... Of the European Union.

We are very much saying that one of

the consequences of Brexit you

thought was to reaffirm Paris's

centrality in the financial system

in France is their strong pitch to

British financial institutions

forward to Paris how is it going?

In

China I do not speak about Brexit. I

do not push any message. I fully

disagree with that. I think that for

China and I look at your about to be

very much corner. We are linked and

we're close to linked on many topics

very important for both of us.

Second, in terms of European

dialogue of financial services, for

sure. For sure we want to attract

the maximum duty. Why? Because this

decision has meant that for a lot of

players. So a lot of ISO decide to

be part of the EU and the euro zone.

And they'll have to choose between

different countries so there is a

competition between different

countries. Of course there is. And

you have this decision regarding

regulators. As you leave you lose

the regulators and...

I suppose the

case for the cities that has been

built up a big part of the whole

financial system went to unplug the

city from the rest of the European

financial stock shirt is a big risk

and a danger.

Look, I think first of

all, it is not my willingness and

not a reasonable that the dock I

figure something to be taken into

consideration in your own proposals

in the future. My willingness as not

to unplug as you say the reddish I

think he does not make sense because

it is part of the whole financing of

our European Union. For sure, if

there is no change in terms of full

access to the financial single

market, and doesn't make sense. So I

want to preserve what we created

post world war and at what we

created was this sophisticated

organisation called the European

Union which is for the very first

time, not a hegemony of one or the

other's, but a very concrete,

Democratic construction.

Why do you

think the British photo to leave

this sophisticated structure?

Look

I'm not the one to judge or comment

the decision of your people. My

interpretation is that a lot of

people who lost from globalisation

decided it was not normal for them.

You see such a risk when you ask yes

or no and accomplish cave-in

situation. If France it had better

in a similar context but our context

was very different. So I don't want

to make any to take any bets. I

would have definitely fought very

hard to win but I see is a mistake

when you just ask yes or no when you

don't ask people how to improve the

situation and to explain how to

improve it thus I do believe that it

would be better to assess the

people. Alas for the Brexit wrote my

understanding is that middle classes

and working classes and especially

the oldest in your country, decided

that the recent EKGs were not in

their favour. I met the adjustments

made by the EU and globalisation,

set I think is a mixable film, was

found in their favour. Which means

what? First is not sustainable to

have an unbalanced organisation.

Probably one of the bitter debate,

it was too favourable just for the

city and less favourable for the

rest of the country so...

Surely it

was about Europe is on the structure

of Europe.

Second I think one of the

reasons was precisely an

organisation of our European Union

probably Bush gets too far in terms

of freedom without cohesion. Towards

free markets without any rules and

any conversions. I have to say that

your government had some

possibilities in it. Ten years ago

after the director that any vacation

because all your people were saying

the Hungarian or Polish workers are

much more favoured than I am so it

was executive debate we had in

France. Ten to 15 years ago. I gave

some directives that a lot of your

governments pushed at the time St

Ives you are not a free market. I do

believe in a free-market. I do

believe in a economy but we do need

regulation and conversions. Which

means what we lost in the recent

years in Europe, that is convergence

of solidarity message. It is no more

sustainable to have some countries

taking cohesion funds, taking money

from the European Union, in order to

converge in using the money to

diverge. IE to reduce the labour

standards are to reduce the

corporate taxes. So that's why...

Sorry to interrupted but your vision

seems to be deepening Europe as a

response to this. You want a single

financial Minister over the whole

thing, more European taxes, or done

at the centre. Again is that not a

terrible risk?

No. Because his

legislation. I think what we need

first of all is to have a much more

protective Europe. From the Fray

beginning I am totally dedicated in

making our Europe more protective to

our people so what I do believe is

that first Europe should not mean

just adapting yourself when you are

part of working classes are middle

classes but the best answer is we

have collective risks and threats.

Europe is something that we will be

protecting you. Collective security,

migration as your organisation. I

would say in the mid to long range

view of Europe it is the following.

I do believe that we have a European

Union and...

Definitely?

It depends

on you. I do respect his vote but I

do regret the so. I would love to

welcome you again. Your vision of a

different Europe. My vision very

short run being much more concrete.

Less bureaucracy. More concrete in

order to protect the pole and

organisations and our collective

future. We have to prepare for a new

organisation which could be the

following. We will be 27 at the EU

level. For me the mid to long one

perspective my definition is to

gather some countries within the

CPU. It will enlarge processing took

the eight counterpart. This EU

should have a tiller of single

markets. Common values and rights.

To be defended that is the first

circle. And a series of inner

circles on different policies.

So

I'm not the bit that there is are in

the case.

On defence, on migration.

For me the core of this Europe is a

fairy inner circle, isn't opened

half on guard. Where we decide to

have a much stronger integration and

to work for together in economic and

strategic terms.

Let me move on if

we may.

More sovereignty. If user

sovereignty and you don't attack

people they don't believe in you. If

you are not based on democratic

approach to waterfall you. If you

are not following unity they will

leave.

He said France is back.

What

did you mean by that? I mean that we

are delivering performs which were

impossible for decades. That's it.

We fixed a series of internal

difficulties and we increased our

capacity to be competitive. This is

for me and the pillar because when

you're not credible on home Roto

Jesse Carver outside.

You talk about

values which must involve I pursue

freedom of the press and human

rights and so forth. Did you raise

those with the tiniest president

when you talk to him?

Hise said this

involved leaders I met. What did he

say to you? I do this job in France

in order to relaunch Europe for each

understand the full picture. The job

we make you Francisco for France.

I'm sure in the coming years we will

improve our figures in terms of

employment, reduce our deficit and

so on. That's it. It allows me to be

more credible at the European level

and convince especially Germany, to

work together to relaunch this new

Europe. And third and allows us to

be more credible at the

international scale. On different

subjects on different topics. Taking

the leadership on climate change

AUMA on Lebanon and several issues.

Try Japan on climate change that you

mention. I just want to very

quickly...

On human rights. Taking

this part. I raised human rights

directly with all the leaders. In

China it's absolutely counter

productive to raise it. The local

system there is not the situation is

not going to help you think. I do

believe is totally

counterproductive. So what I did as

a had a direct discussion. We

discussed this issue. I provided I

was a visibility and the ability for

them to be sure that this is not a

promising in front of the camera. So

that's it. It's different when I

speak with the Turkish president

because we had hours of discussion

on human rights but I should add

very clear statement...

Let me ask

you about this but just thought what

you said but President Trump has

said about certain countries. He

denies about a lot of the city used

that word. Amongst the African

countries who were outraged and very

offended by that were many

Francophone countries, many

French-speaking countries in Africa,

did you share their average?

For

sure. For sure? Is not a word you

can use. If you want precisely to

build peace, development in this

country and respect for... You can

just kind of words. But by

definition, and I think a lot of are

issues are due to frustrations due

to a lot of past humiliations and we

have to understand that and I do

believe that we need, we have to

respect all the countries. Laszlo we

own them and that's much more

efficient. So I have very direct

relationship with President Trump.

You sat down with him for dinner at

the top of the Eiffel Tower. I

wonder what you make of him as a

person come to come across a messy

person?

I think he is not classical

politician. First of all he was

elected by his people he is the

president of the United States. And

that is a great country. So I want

to work with him and I think they

built a very strong relationship.

We

disagree on several topics.

Sure.

And I call him very regularly. I'm

always right direct with him.

Sometimes I managed to convince and

sometimes I fail.

The wick up in the

morning thinking what is he tweeted

to stay?

Know because I think we

should not... We should not I think

that his tweets, I'm asking you

because I was business assertive mix

between personal and political

reaction and I think it's not

feasible when you are president of

the three so masking with a sly

smile to face but it is a serious

you have something like the North

Korean situation when Trump

basically says my nuclear button is

bigger than your nuclear but a lot

people will think this is just

slightly unhinged and very

dangerous. Yes but the best answer

you right that is what? Just to say

we have to work recklessly and

seriously to force North Korea to

come back to the table for

negotiations. We have to follow UN

sanctions and implement them and

critical country in order to deliver

his China.

Absolutely.

Talk about

bringing countries back... To think

there's any chance developers saying

the Americans to come back to the

table on the Paris country change

agreement.

I don't think there's any

option to come back on the table

negotiation to the piercing claimant

is negotiated and signed. This is

the site design what is done.

Why we will not renegotiate for one

people. I do believe it is a big

mistake. I told him there's no new

negotiation. To join or you don't

join. China decided to remain in the

loop. And we will deliver. We have

to accelerate. What I see is that

private sector and states in the US

are following this line. They're

trying to compliance agreement that

citizens take that there will be no

renegotiation. The centre budgeted

to provide president Montague River

that? I think I've ever used like

that this expression. When I was

asked you how to fund his people

just capture one word and then take

it with the context of the buses

commentating when you preside you

have to preside is different from

governing and you have to be, you

have to avoid permanent comments, to

avoid sort of day to day residence

without strong positions. I would

not say that exactly. You need

efficiency, authority, humanity. So

that is why this third pillar is not

compatible with Jupiter. Annette

Young sky. But what is important to

me and Mr want to say is that our

credibility is to say what we want

to do, to deliver, to change the

country to prepare the country for

the new centuries and that's what

we're doing in France because that

is a precondition to succeeding in

Europe. Our role in this world is to

help everywhere to build peace. That

is set. As might job.

Thank you very

much indeed.