:00:00. > :00:21.All 28 leaders of the European Union word holed in buildings here in
:00:22. > :00:26.Brussels for hours late into the night to the end of last week trying
:00:27. > :00:31.to strike a deal that would keep the UK in the European Union. The
:00:32. > :00:32.British people have their say on what they came up with in a
:00:33. > :00:34.referendum in June. If they vote to leave
:00:35. > :00:43.the EU what will it mean for the UK My guess today is the president of
:00:44. > :00:43.the European parliament, Martin Schulz.
:00:44. > :01:04.Could Britain's vote tear the whole union apart?
:01:05. > :01:13.Martin Schulz, welcome to HARDtalk. Thank you. Did David Cameron get a
:01:14. > :01:19.good deal from the other leaders of the European Union? Yes. It was a
:01:20. > :01:23.difficult negotiation, but very prepared and by parliament
:01:24. > :01:31.contributed to improve the papers on the table and I think, yes, it is a
:01:32. > :01:37.deal which helped, I hope, to convince British voters to say in
:01:38. > :01:39.the European Union. It is a far cry from the fundamental change he
:01:40. > :01:46.promised when he went into the negotiation, isn't it? I think there
:01:47. > :01:50.is a change to the four pages of this negotiation paper and the deal
:01:51. > :01:55.on the basis of that paper, you will find a lot of things he asked for,
:01:56. > :01:58.especially the agreement on better lawmaking between the European
:01:59. > :02:03.Union, the commission and the member states, which shows a lot of
:02:04. > :02:08.requests from David Cameron, less burden for small to medium
:02:09. > :02:12.enterprises, more effectiveness, less bureaucracy, more transparency,
:02:13. > :02:16.is already in that agreement, so I think that the deal is based on some
:02:17. > :02:21.major improvements. Let's consider what difference it will make. Those
:02:22. > :02:27.things you are talking about were things that he European Union,
:02:28. > :02:32.Brussels, promised it would do, become more competitive. What about
:02:33. > :02:37.this promise that the UK will be excluded from ever closer union? Do
:02:38. > :02:46.you think that will actually change anything for the UK? I think the
:02:47. > :02:54.list of opt outs of the UK from European policies is impressive, and
:02:55. > :03:01.opt out from Schengen, the euro, the police and justice cooperation in
:03:02. > :03:07.some areas, so if ever closer union was not binding in the past, the UK
:03:08. > :03:11.is approved. So what we described now is a reality. That is what I am
:03:12. > :03:18.curious about, what is different? Those things already exist. Now the
:03:19. > :03:23.28 member states agreed this is not binding for those who don't want
:03:24. > :03:28.that. This is clarity. It makes clarification for British voters in
:03:29. > :03:32.the referendum that this is now crystal clear, this is not binding
:03:33. > :03:39.for the United Kingdom. And the treaties will be changed to reflect
:03:40. > :03:45.that? Future treaty changes, changes to come, yes. This is an agreement
:03:46. > :03:47.to include this when the treaty change will happen in the next
:03:48. > :03:55.years. But one thing we should add is also other countries, especially
:03:56. > :04:01.eurozone countries, yes, in a future treaty change, that should be
:04:02. > :04:04.implemented and others as well. To be clear, because a lot of people
:04:05. > :04:09.have said different things about this, not least the French Foreign
:04:10. > :04:12.Minister, who says there will be no revision of treaties, no veto for
:04:13. > :04:16.the UK and no calling into question the principle of free circulation,
:04:17. > :04:20.that is certainly different from what has been told to the UK which
:04:21. > :04:23.is that this will be legally binding and irreversible because it will be
:04:24. > :04:31.in the treaties of the EU, that is right? The deal with the United
:04:32. > :04:35.Kingdom was absolutely clear. Never closer union is legally not binding
:04:36. > :04:39.for the United Kingdom. It was agreed between the 28 member states
:04:40. > :04:46.and in the future treaty change that will be written exactly, literally
:04:47. > :04:50.like it is in the treaty. So, nobody can tell to British voters other
:04:51. > :04:56.things. It was written clearly on the paper. OK. On migrants and
:04:57. > :04:59.benefits, which is a big issue which caused difficulties on negotiations,
:05:00. > :05:02.there was as a result of this deal that there will be changes to
:05:03. > :05:07.in-work benefits with a four-year taper that can be in place for seven
:05:08. > :05:13.years, and then they will be paid child benefit at the cost of living
:05:14. > :05:18.from the migrants own country. Do you think the effect of those
:05:19. > :05:25.changes to benefits will put EU migrants off going to the UK? I
:05:26. > :05:34.don't believe so. The whole exercise was to protect the United Kingdom
:05:35. > :05:38.for the time being, to be abused with the welfare system of the
:05:39. > :05:44.United Kingdom, and this is understandable, and in a temporary
:05:45. > :05:47.limited time I think it is admissible to accept differences
:05:48. > :05:52.between UK citizens and noncitizens. If this is temporarily
:05:53. > :05:59.limited it is acceptable because other countries did the same after
:06:00. > :06:06.the Eastern Europe countries joined the EU. Some countries, my own
:06:07. > :06:10.included, had a seven year free period of access to the labour
:06:11. > :06:14.market. The UK did not participate in there. That is the justification
:06:15. > :06:20.for allowing it but my question is different - will it put off migrants
:06:21. > :06:26.and you say no? For the time being the UK described the situation, and
:06:27. > :06:34.the situation was the justification to get this out. The answer to your
:06:35. > :06:38.question is logically, if this is then applied, I think it will lead
:06:39. > :06:43.to less migration to the United Kingdom but for the time being it is
:06:44. > :06:50.obviously the case that the United Kingdom argues we have too much and
:06:51. > :06:54.therefore we want that opt out and I understood your question as a
:06:55. > :06:59.question for the future - will it in future times - and it is difficult
:07:00. > :07:05.for me to predict it, but I presume the opt out is asked to prevent too
:07:06. > :07:09.much in the United Kingdom. Indeed it is but there are some people who
:07:10. > :07:14.say that you can introduce changes but they won't make a difference,
:07:15. > :07:17.they won't put people off coming, so why did you have so many leaders
:07:18. > :07:23.negotiating into the night over this? Look at some people might say
:07:24. > :07:27.it, OK, but the reality is the United Kingdom feels too much burden
:07:28. > :07:37.for the time being. I think for the labour market, they asked that a
:07:38. > :07:40.temporary limit exception because they want to bring order in that
:07:41. > :07:46.situation, and the goal is to reduce the number of people looking for a
:07:47. > :07:51.job in the United Kingdom with this additional credits and therefore the
:07:52. > :07:58.whole exercise led to exactly that conclusion. So, it may be that
:07:59. > :08:01.people say, it won't lead to the effects David Cameron raced but my
:08:02. > :08:10.opinion is it will lead to it. That makes for a lot of people, by the
:08:11. > :08:13.way, it led to difficult debate in the European council, because
:08:14. > :08:18.especially the eastern European countries felt that this is a
:08:19. > :08:23.problem for their citizens and therefore I have to repeat that it
:08:24. > :08:28.will create the perfect but everybody must be clear it is
:08:29. > :08:33.temporarily limited. Seven years, no more. And the other thing is that
:08:34. > :08:37.other people not least Germany, since it has been struck, have
:08:38. > :08:41.looked at it and have said, we should look if we can apply this,
:08:42. > :08:47.indexation of child benefit, for example. Exclusively, indexation of
:08:48. > :08:53.child benefit, all others claim to do the same. A spokes person said it
:08:54. > :08:58.is a viable option that child benefits will be adjusted and they
:08:59. > :09:01.will discuss it. That was one conclusion that from a certain
:09:02. > :09:04.moment it is open for all member states to do the same, and the
:09:05. > :09:09.German Chancellor said this is a thing we should consider as well,
:09:10. > :09:15.yes, that is true, but only this one. Only that aspect? This was a
:09:16. > :09:17.fear that was raised, this idea of contagion. Is it entirely acceptable
:09:18. > :09:22.if other countries now say let index child benefit? I have a certain
:09:23. > :09:26.understanding for it because the question is where other children
:09:27. > :09:31.living? If someone is working in one place and family is living in
:09:32. > :09:38.another place the question is not if he has not the right to get child
:09:39. > :09:44.benefit but the child benefit should be linked to where the child lives.
:09:45. > :09:47.This is no dramatic thing. I find it a very pragmatic approach. Other
:09:48. > :09:50.countries saying OK we will do the same and that is understandable.
:09:51. > :09:56.There will be some element of contagion. We discussed at the
:09:57. > :10:02.request of the UK and this was a specific UK negotiation, not German.
:10:03. > :10:05.If the Germans, after the agreement, say one element of the
:10:06. > :10:14.agreement could apply also for us, OK. But that doesn't change the
:10:15. > :10:18.reality that we negotiated about the specific status of the United
:10:19. > :10:22.Kingdom. You will know David Cameron came back and there were plenty of
:10:23. > :10:28.people not least a Tory MP Jacob Rees who said for so much labour he
:10:29. > :10:35.has achieved so little. And it was this argument that, you had everyone
:10:36. > :10:40.talking about child benefit, or tapering in-work benefits. These are
:10:41. > :10:43.tiny details that are not the fundamental reform that a lot of
:10:44. > :10:48.Britain wants a. Yes but this is because I can't comment on every
:10:49. > :10:54.observation of any backbencher in the Tories. I want to ask you about
:10:55. > :10:57.another conservative MP, the Mayor of London Boris Johnson, because he
:10:58. > :11:02.argues, you may say it is significant, but he thinks there is
:11:03. > :11:08.a better and bigger negotiation that can be had and he is arguing,
:11:09. > :11:11.campaigning, to leave the EU because he says there is only one way to get
:11:12. > :11:17.the change we need, and that is to vote to go because all EU history
:11:18. > :11:22.shows that only listen to population when it says no. I would like to be
:11:23. > :11:27.in a reformed EU, that is my hope, and EU based on fundamental change.
:11:28. > :11:32.I have nothing to comment about Boris Johnson and what he is doing
:11:33. > :11:37.-- an. One thing is clear for me, clearer since Boris Johnson has
:11:38. > :11:41.expressed his view, for the first time since a long time a
:11:42. > :11:45.conservative Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is fighting for
:11:46. > :11:52.Europe and for the European Union. This is progress in itself. So Boris
:11:53. > :11:55.Johnson contributed to a real change in Europe. The Prime Minister of the
:11:56. > :11:58.United Kingdom is fighting for the European Union. Boris Johnson is
:11:59. > :12:03.suggesting something else, that there could be a second referendum
:12:04. > :12:08.and a second renegotiation. He should read the conclusions. My
:12:09. > :12:12.feeling is he is also contributing to clarification. The Prime Minister
:12:13. > :12:20.of the United Kingdom is running for the campaign to stay in and that
:12:21. > :12:26.makes him, because it is not about a Tory debate, it is about the
:12:27. > :12:31.competence of British voters, all British voters, and this is an
:12:32. > :12:35.advantage for David Cameron. OK, so, if there is this referendum in
:12:36. > :12:40.June, and actually the British people vote to leave, and perhaps,
:12:41. > :12:45.perhaps David Cameron resigns, or David Cameron comes back, or maybe
:12:46. > :12:50.Boris Johnson is negotiating again and saving, hold on a second, we
:12:51. > :12:58.might be prepared to stay in a fully reformed EU -- saying. OK, now we
:12:59. > :13:04.have an agreement, we are running all to convince British citizens to
:13:05. > :13:09.vote for that agreement. I am asking you, could there be a second deal?
:13:10. > :13:18.28 heads of state and government after a very difficult and details
:13:19. > :13:26.negotiations, on the basis of a very tough negotiated result, are now
:13:27. > :13:33.asking all together British voters to vote for an agreement on the
:13:34. > :13:38.table. What do you believe, that we ask all together British voters to
:13:39. > :13:44.vote yes because we say, but if you vote not yet then we restart the
:13:45. > :13:49.whole exercise? I think it is quite clear that we ask it is a good
:13:50. > :13:54.deal, British voters to vote yes. But you don't will out a
:13:55. > :13:58.renegotiation, an alternative, more fundamental, after a no vote, which
:13:59. > :14:01.could lead to another referendum. The only thing I will out is the
:14:02. > :14:07.following one, that I participate in any debate about not to defend the
:14:08. > :14:13.deal we agreed and to ask British voters to vote for that deal. I
:14:14. > :14:16.could never imagine in my life where it is the case to support a
:14:17. > :14:20.conservative Prime Minister of the United Kingdom to fight for the
:14:21. > :14:23.European Union! It is a wonderful thing. You are enjoying it.
:14:24. > :14:29.Absolutely! It changed Europe already. Look, the fact that a
:14:30. > :14:35.conservative Prime Minister, a Tory Prime Minister, is now running in
:14:36. > :14:37.the Commons across the country, defending the European Union, saying
:14:38. > :14:39.we should stay in because it is better for us and the union, this is
:14:40. > :14:53.real progress. But he might not win. He will. I am
:14:54. > :15:01.convinced. And those who are saying vote to leave and have a free trade
:15:02. > :15:11.arrangement with the EU. He raised the number of free trade agreements
:15:12. > :15:18.to 57. He has to renegotiate with all of the states of the European
:15:19. > :15:23.Union. Let us be honest about that. This is a better way to stay in.
:15:24. > :15:27.Between negotiating with people who want access to British markets, so
:15:28. > :15:36.there would be, not least the companies within the EU, saying do a
:15:37. > :15:40.deal because we need the buyers. I'm grateful for your question because
:15:41. > :15:45.it shows the Eichmann for those who want to leave and restart the whole
:15:46. > :15:52.negotiation process. They're leaving one of the biggest economies of the
:15:53. > :15:59.world in limbo for years. Particularly in uncertain times. Is
:16:00. > :16:05.better to stay in. The day after the deal was struck, Britain remains in
:16:06. > :16:15.the EU, it kills it under the conditions it is in. If it leaves,
:16:16. > :16:18.it kills it too. The art and that was that setting up special
:16:19. > :16:21.conditions to those not happy to start to the membership causes
:16:22. > :16:26.problems because any member of the state could say I want that. Do you
:16:27. > :16:32.think there is something in that that it has damaged the European
:16:33. > :16:39.Union? The agreement on Friday and Saturday was crystal clear. It was a
:16:40. > :16:43.United Kingdom agreement. It was only the United Kingdom asking and
:16:44. > :16:47.the government pushing for a referendum. On the other countries
:16:48. > :16:55.it was discussed. I've heard that 27 heads of government that this was a
:16:56. > :16:59.UK deal. Nobody made a similar appeal. But all those leaders go
:17:00. > :17:05.back home to the country 's with there are significant Eurosceptic
:17:06. > :17:10.parties saying that we want some of that. I hope my answer was clear
:17:11. > :17:16.enough. And I repeat. There's no room for Semler besieges. There was
:17:17. > :17:20.another issue to be discussed and that is migration and the refugee
:17:21. > :17:24.crisis. Is their frustration there was discussion about ' yellow
:17:25. > :17:31.particularly in Germany that we had not found the necessary solidarity
:17:32. > :17:37.with other countries. But we also moved in the right direction. We'll
:17:38. > :17:42.meet again with the Turkish government and we will apply to the
:17:43. > :17:50.so-called package with Turkey and we will control the borders more
:17:51. > :17:55.effectively, and the transfer of those who have no right to be
:17:56. > :18:02.political asylum seekers. We agree on the relocation scheme and putting
:18:03. > :18:09.that into force and we have a good chance to do that. Will look at the
:18:10. > :18:17.way the EU is reacting to the situation in Greece. Let us be
:18:18. > :18:20.precise. My parliament, the commission, even some of the
:18:21. > :18:27.authorities of the countries are acting coherent and in a clear and
:18:28. > :18:33.precise and defined way of relocation, receiving the citizens
:18:34. > :18:42.in the hotspots, identification, and cooperation between the necessary
:18:43. > :18:51.authorities. Who is objecting against his? And the threat to
:18:52. > :19:00.reimpose for a new border... Who is arguing for that? The European Union
:19:01. > :19:05.or member states with an egoistic approach. They are saying if they
:19:06. > :19:10.don't get their act together the border will be reimpose in three
:19:11. > :19:21.months. It will be a big refugee camp. And that would be a mistake?
:19:22. > :19:31.Absolutely. What will the people do. Will they flee from Islamic state?
:19:32. > :19:37.Will look for another way. They will head to the Mediterranean. You will
:19:38. > :19:44.not prevent with closing the borders someone who is fleeing from Islamic
:19:45. > :19:49.State. To close the borders is no solution. It would be a fair
:19:50. > :19:55.redistribution of the refugees among the 28 member states. And yet there
:19:56. > :19:59.is no movement towards that for all the people saying this is what
:20:00. > :20:03.should be done. Countries all over the EU are effectively ditching the
:20:04. > :20:06.agreement and closing their borders. Absolutely. And why? National
:20:07. > :20:21.interest instead This is your bleeding into disaster.
:20:22. > :20:29.On the migration question, how do you change that? Because there is no
:20:30. > :20:35.evidence countries will accept the redistribution. We need a pragmatic
:20:36. > :20:41.solution based on our humanitarian responsibility. We are the richest
:20:42. > :20:51.part of the world and very egoistic in some of the member states. Joe --
:20:52. > :20:55.Joe Mennie has said that refugees can coming to our country. And we
:20:56. > :21:02.ask that other countries practice that solidarity. You know there are
:21:03. > :21:08.plenty of people in Europe that say that Germany has made a mistake and
:21:09. > :21:13.acted like a magnet. I can't understand that a very rich country
:21:14. > :21:18.sticking to this humanitarian responsibility makes a mistake. If
:21:19. > :21:23.it is a mistake to be solid with people fleeing Islamic State, then I
:21:24. > :21:28.will repeat that mistake. Those who are saying it is a German problem,
:21:29. > :21:34.we have nothing to do with it, I draw a fence around my country and
:21:35. > :21:45.then globalisation will pass away. So Austria, Sweden... They've
:21:46. > :21:51.already drawing up defence when they were taking in refugee. We should
:21:52. > :21:57.not blame them, but the others had not taken a single refugee. Because
:21:58. > :22:02.they've taken so many, they are closing their borders or putting a
:22:03. > :22:07.cap on it. Are you saying don't blame them because they've already
:22:08. > :22:16.taken them in? I find this unfair for those who taken hundreds of
:22:17. > :22:22.thousands of refugees compare to those who have taken nobody cast be
:22:23. > :22:34.criticised. I would criticise those who have taken nobody. Like to? --
:22:35. > :22:40.who? The Prime Minister of Hungary, here in the European Parliament
:22:41. > :22:43.standing beside me said, ladies and gentlemen, this is a German
:22:44. > :22:50.problem. It is not I Hungary and problem. We don't take refugees.
:22:51. > :22:56.This is a member state of the European Union. What you think
:22:57. > :23:02.should happen? You blame the countries like Sweden who have taken
:23:03. > :23:08.many refugees. What you think should happen to those people question
:23:09. > :23:15.yellow we should stick to the relocation scheme. And if they don't
:23:16. > :23:24.accept it with you kick them out -- will you? I can't risk excluding a
:23:25. > :23:29.country from the European Union. I prefer to answer to the previous
:23:30. > :23:34.question, how to solve a problem. Not through exclusion, but by
:23:35. > :23:38.encouraging those countries who want to participate in the relocation
:23:39. > :23:44.scheme to do so and to start to relocate the people. The refugee
:23:45. > :23:49.crisis, Britain leaving, can you remember a time when the EU was
:23:50. > :23:59.under threat as it was now? Is very data it can tear itself apart -- is
:24:00. > :24:07.there a possibility? Never in my lifetime. If Reddish voters vote to
:24:08. > :24:17.stay in the European Union, this is a signal of an coachman for all of
:24:18. > :24:45.us. -- British. Thank you for coming in.
:24:46. > :24:47.Fairly frosty out there at the moment.
:24:48. > :24:50.The sunshine that many saw by day captured nicely by some of
:24:51. > :24:53.our Weather Watchers, well, followed by moonlit skies through the night.
:24:54. > :24:56.The cloud melted away for many, and temperatures have taken a tumble.
:24:57. > :24:59.Even in the city centres we've got temperatures close to freezing