Speech by President of the Government entitled "Protecting the ideal of Europe"

Madrid Athenaeum

President of the Government.- Good afternoon dear friends; members of government, ambassadors, President of the Athenaeum, Board of the Athenaeum; Vice-President of the Athenaeum, thank you for your words, President of the Spanish Federal Council of the European Movement, thank you also for your words,

Ladies and gentlemen,

The President of the Spanish Federal Council of the European Movement mentioned earlier that on 15 January of this year I gave a speech to the European Parliament to talk about the future of the EU. There I called on the need to protect Europe so that Europe can protect its citizens; in other words, an action - that of protecting Europe to ensure a consequence: a protective Europe.

In the first part of that statement - protecting Europe - I called for the need for Europeans to become aware of the critical time facing the EU, and to act accordingly to redress this challenge we are facing.

If you would prefer to make it clearer, taking the side of pro-European forces on 26 May in elections in which a great deal is at stake, in which there is probably more at stake than in the previous European elections, could mean either decisively boosting the European project or laying it to rest. And this is taking place at a time in which we most need a strong Europe.

In the second part of that statement - a protective Europe - you can see a firm commitment, a decisive commitment to a social Europe, not as an ideological commitment, which it also is, or as an opportunity, which is undoubtedly necessary, but rather because in my opinion, this is the very heart of the European project in today's world. We either push through a social Europe or progress will not filter down to the social majority. We either build a social Europe or growth will not be redistributed and equality will wither which will only add to social exclusion.

Social Europe is the strength that will allow the European project a renewed legitimacy for its basis. A Europe that protects is a cohesive Europe that unites a society with facts and not just with words; with greater, rather than less, solidarity; with real convergence, rather than just nominal convergence; that allows growth to be maintained on much sounder and more sustainable foundations than those we have seen over this last decade. Only in this way will the EU be felt by Europeans in the street as their own project, as belonging to them, rather than as the heritage of an enlightened, cosmopolitan class.

In reality, the European ideal - let's remember this - was built through what became known as the social democratic pact - the pact shared for many decades by political and ideological formations that conceived society in a very different fashion. This social democratic pact lasted in time, and this was achieved by leaders of different ideologies, as now, by building up Europe, and through a shared perception, which is that social democracy forms part of the very DNA of Europe.

We are social democrats because we believe that a social Europe is the Europe that protects and progresses without leaving anyone behind.

Protecting Europe thus means protecting it rather than looking inward, as we are also seeing in other political proposals; not weakening it by entrenching the problems, and much less by dispersing them with mental or even physical trenches. Nor does it mean centralising power, denying the diversity of Europe or weakening the principle of subsidiarity that is so important in the European construction process.

Protecting Europe means federalising it. It means returning to the alignment of principles with actions, philosophy with reality, values with facts. We are very clear about European principles, philosophy and values. The legacy, in short, of the French Revolution: liberty, equality and fraternity.

Banishing forever the memory of a Europe bloodied by wars and territorial disputes; fraternity, more than ever before, between the peoples of Europe. Fraternity also means voluntarily sharing part of our sovereignty. By sharing this sovereignty, we are precisely becoming more sovereign on the major issues that overwhelm us if we try to fight alone.

Europe was born out of the idealism of men and women who gathered together around movements such as the one that hosts today's conference. Around the legacy of men such as Altiero Spinelli who gave shape to the foundations of a federal Europe in the prisons of Mussolini's Italy.

The European movement is, in these terms, a genuine seed of the European Community that was officially founded in 1957 - a cross-cutting movement in ideological terms, backed by those who, from different perspectives and different concepts of society, shared the same attribute - pro-Europeanism.

Today, at this forum, dear Patxi, I wish to acknowledge the commitment of the European Federal Movement and thank you for your hard work and advocate the spirit of the European Movement.

The idea of a united Europe, as you are aware, was born out of the ashes of the Second World War. And it grew through the warmth of unprecedented socio-economic development over the following three decades. If we look back, the idea of a Europe in constant expansion had never been questioned. First towards the north, then towards the Mediterranean and finally towards the east in the wake of the fall of the Berlin Wall. But then, three years ago,, for the first time, an event took place that I believe marked a before and an after in the European construction project.

And Europe shrank. The triumph of those in favour of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union marked, as I just said, a before and an after in the history of the European construction project. The day after tomorrow, the European Council will have to study the different scenarios as a result of the two votes against that have taken place in the British Parliament. From these votes held in the British Parliament, it is possible to conclude that we know what the United Kingdom does not want, but we don't know what it does want. And I would like to make four assessments in this regard.

The first, I also said this in Parliament, in the Lower House, but I want to mention it now, is that I regret, whilst I also respect, as is only right and proper, the decision taken by the United Kingdom to leave the EU. I have always felt that contributions by each and every Member State are fundamental, which includes the United Kingdom, to help build Europe.

The second is that we have a withdrawal agreement, and it is the best one possible; the only viable solution. And the British Parliament must understand this. Spain will adopt a constructive position to ensure the orderly withdrawal of the United Kingdom. If the withdrawal agreement is not ratified by 29 March, we will need to listen closely to the proposal from the British Parliament. If an extension is proposed, it should indicate to what end and for how long. You cannot make progress by going round in circles.

Third assessment, confidence. Faced with a potential disorderly withdrawal by the United Kingdom, Spain is ready. We have already drawn up a contingency plan that we expect to be ratified, hopefully by a broad majority of the standing committee in the Lower House of Parliament. We will work to ensure, in this regard, the best possible relations with the British people, not only given the importance colony of Spanish citizens who live in the United Kingdom and of British citizens who live in Spain, but also the major economic and trade relations we have with the British people.

And finally, I would like to make a reflection because democracy, fortunately, is not just "head or tails"; it is not a coin that is thrown into the air with only two possibilities. Fortunately democracy, as I said before, has more options.

The choice was not, in my opinion, and should never be either staying in the Europe of the 'status quo' or of leaving. There is another option, which was never conceived by those who called for Brexit, and this amounts to the true response in this global world in which challenges require unity from us. That option was always Europe, but a better Europe.

Brexit is the materialisation of a time in which lies paved the way, through the use of completely wrong resolution mechanisms, such as a referendum to tackle complex dilemmas. An emotional "yes" was called for; a feeling rather than a vote. And we all know how these feelings without counterbalances work in such a blind fashion.

The British people are now discovering what life without Europe may be like, without its internal market, without its commitment, without its solidarity and the joint efforts of the other countries. They are discovering that by voting to leave, they voted for less wealth and greater seclusion; less influence and a greater loss of real, tangible benefits for British society as a whole.

The British Parliament, faced with the dilemmas raised by the destruction by Brexit of the network of legal, political and social relations of the last 45 years, now finds itself in a situation of total stalemate.

And it is possible that this leads to a terrible paradox, which is that the British people, who perhaps are now in favour of staying in the EU, end up leaving. Market surveys back this up.

What is undoubtedly clear is that young people, those young people who have reached the legal age, over the last three years since the United Kingdom held the referendum, are predominantly pro-European. In other words, the future of the United Kingdom, is pro-European.

In short, an unprotected society is a society more likely to create and believe in false prophets. Prophets with different faces - authoritarians, extremists or nationalists - all with the same intellectual approach: simple solutions to complex problems, more fences, more customs tariffs, more redeployments… That is the proposal made by extremists - exaggerating the fear so that society becomes entrenched. And it may be that this fear grows out of the skill with which those who inspire it manipulate it; this is clear, we are seeing this in other parts of the planet.

But furthermore, and this is the thought I wish to share with you, through our own failings. Maybe we have trusted so much in the symbolic power of the concept of Europe, in the strength of future promises, or in its original legitimacy that we have forgotten to act in the present. And this present is called inequality. It is called insecurity, migration, global warming, the gender gap, the future of our young people, offshoring, the impact of digitalisation and artificial intelligence on the labour market, the ageing population, the gentrification of cities, increasingly difficult access by young people to housing and citizen security in response to organised crime and international terrorism.

It is the context of this reality that helps the enemies of a united Europe to make progress, committed to stopping the watch on history and placing its hands once again in the nostalgic past that they idealise.

But the future of a society is not, it cannot be, it mustn't be, its past. The enemies of Europe, who are not only outside of it, they are also within, will never resolve existing problems; on the contrary, they will exacerbate them and create other new problems.

Because they feed off of conflict. Their existence is justified by the persistence of problems. Their logic is to entrench problems rather than solve them. In short, they polarise societies rather than uniting them around a common goal. The enemies of Europe even contest objective facts. They would even contest, if you will allow me to express this colloquially, should it prove necessary, the sun rising in the east and setting in the west. Nothing illustrates this better than that phrase by a Brexiteer who said the following, "People are tired of wisdom and experts".

The goal was undoubtedly to take away the credibility of empirical evidence. Of the objective damage of the economic disaster of Brexit. By planting the seed of doubt in the experts, he not only disaccredited their arguments due to their source, the so-called 'ad hominen' fallacy, but also sowed division through confrontation between the people and the elite, between losers and winners, between the rural world and the urban world.

In those times of Brexit, there was another British politician who used demagogy to make politics. One of the leaders said something like, after the referendum in the United Kingdom, there would be "100 million more Europeans who would follow along the same lines". Hence, it wasn't just the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union that they sought, it was the death of Europe itself.

A statement, furthermore, given the experience of the last three years, that was fairly frivolous, since at today's date, no other Europeans wishes to follow them. The parties that included withdrawal from the European Union in their manifestos have reformulated this intention in light of the disaster it would be in electoral terms. Their anti-European sentiment is now muffled; they have learned to cover it up, because they know that European citizens will not buy that argument, because they instinctively feel that unity makes them stronger and that separation only brings greater uncertainty and unease to their lives.

But let's not kid ourselves, they continue to think the same, let's not be fooled. They want to return to a pre-enlightenment Europe that does not believe in reason. To an aggressive and conflictive Europe. In short, to a Europe that is hostile to its own citizens. They want, as I said before, to see the death of Europe.

To defeat them, we need an ideal of Europe that translates into certainties. We all need certainties in life, and ideals are very necessary. Ideals mark a horizon that we strive towards, but we must also accept that ideals are not enough to fill the larder, or to reduce the cost of the rent for our young people, or, of course, to guarantee decent pensions.

That is why it is good for us to measure and recognise the damage done by the paradigm of austerity over these 10 years of the great recession. The damage it not only did in socio-economic terms, but also in emotional terms, in terms of affection for the common project called Europe and we are clearly still suffering from the political side-effects in our political systems, which cannot be doubted.

I have always believed that Europe is a community of values above all else. Europe only makes sense as a project if it defends something that is very precarious for social democracy - cohesion. And there is a dual cohesion that has been in danger in recent years, since the great recession, that it is necessary to urgently restore.

On the one hand, you have what is foreseeable from the point of view of political debate and public conversation, which is social cohesion and territorial cohesion, preventing more insurmountable gaps from opening, such as those that have taken place as a result of the latest economic and financial crisis.

But there is another form of cohesion - political cohesion - the economic cohesion to make progress in a world in which being independent does not mean being sovereign.

Isolation, remaining detached from the European ideal and project, means a loss of economic and political sovereignty when facing challenges that know no borders or walls. But Europe is not only a community of values, it is also a community of interests that must be protected and that can only be protected through unity.

Against this backdrop, Spain's role, in my opinion, is fundamental; more so, if indeed possible, after Brexit. We are the only State that shares a physical border with a continent like Africa which, in just three decades, will double in population. No other border, by the way, so visibly sums up the inequality between continents.. We are the gateway to a strategic area for Spain, which is the Ibero-American Community, with which we have ties of great value to the EU as a whole. And we are undoubtedly a major player, a very important player, in the Mediterranean, which is a theatre of crucial importance for the present and future of Europe.

Spain, those of us here are well aware of this, is a progressive country, a pro-European country out of conviction and also out of choice. Europe means progress instead of regression, advances instead of withdrawal, building a sovereign Europe without having to renounce our identity as Spaniards.

Spain wants to be at the decisive heart of the renewed boost that the EU needs. And I believe that it is already doing so, in fact. And I am convinced that this is the right path, the one that unites us with other pro-European governments, and the one that the vast majority of Spanish society seeks.

A society that, in all the opinion polls and surveys expresses its commitment, time and again, to European values, like almost no other country on the continent.

The European Union protects us from unfair competition from other foreign giants, from the dominant position of other major trading powers. And from the abuses of the large technology companies, as we have seen recently, which trade in the personal details of citizens, sometimes endangering our very democracies.

In other words, these are fair interests and indisputable values that the European Union defends.

The EU we want to see is the Europe of Industry 4.0, competing for excellence, which believes in a modern and entrepreneurial economy without renouncing some of its more distinctive economic powers. Artificial intelligence, the digital universe, robotics and clean energies are all fields fighting to head up new international relations. Europe must look to China and the United States and find its rightful place by their side as peers.

To do that, we must commit to an active trade policy that clearly opens up markets while strengthening the fundamental pillars of a social and democratic project that we want to represents, which both advocates social and environmental policies. And we also clearly want to strengthen the multilateral system.

And, in this endeavour, it is essential to strengthen our industrial capabilities, which have been questioned as a result of offshoring, increasing resources to finance large high-tech projects on a continental scale, with a strategic vision that believes in a territorially balanced Europe.

A Europe capable of competing globally in the markets and rivalling, as I said before, the drive of the United States, China, and also India. But, and this is the thought I wanted to raise in relation to the issue of the drive of the European Union and its role to be played on the international economic relations stage, this cannot be done at the cost of weakening our competition policy or of centralising economic power in the most privileged regions, thus only enhancing the differences within the different regions of the EU.

Europe must remember what good governance means. Good governance means thinking about everyone and governing for everyone; finding the potential of each citizen, of each region, of each country, and allowing this to develop. Sharing out opportunities, in short, and not leaving anyone behind.

Each citizen must have a potential and viable life project. That is what justifies and legitimises this common project.

In 1945, Europe was smart and wise enough to look at the human race, at men and women of flesh and blood, and thenceforth it began to build. That Europe has served to inspire the best dreams of humanity, such as peaceful union, the Declaration of Human Rights and the creation of the Welfare State.

Our goal is to enjoy a good rate of economic growth, this is undoubtedly important, but this must translate into better quality of life, into prosperity and without exclusions. Or better still, our goal is to ensure that no European citizen feels excluded from progress.

We believe that Europe continues to be, in this regard, the best place to live. It has democracy as its form of government, it has economic and cultural wealth and it has built a Welfare State that protects, offers cohesion and legitimises.

But we must regain momentum and face up to new challenges. Our obligation is to protect Europe so that Europe can protect its citizens in the 21st Century.

In my opinion, this proposal translates into the following eight political action targets, which I believe, dear Patxi, dear President of the Federal Council of the European Movement, should also trace out the lines of the new mandate of the European Parliament and of the European Commission.

One: We must consolidate the modernisation and digital and ecological transition of our economy from a leadership position, catering for new sectors whilst not forgetting traditional sectors. Europe must be a continent of knowledge, a continent for the creation of this knowledge, of science, of innovation, of culture and of education, a fair and excellent education system.

Two: We must undertake the new reforms that are pending, including underpinning the single currency, completing the Monetary Union once and for all, culminating the Banking Union, which is so necessary for countries like ours, consolidating the Fiscal Pillar of the Euro and getting the European Deposit Insurance Scheme under way. We must push through a genuine Budget for the Eurozone, with anti-cyclical functions which is what the Government of Spain is advocating to the European Council, thus allowing our economies to better avoid future economic crises.

Three: We must maintain our social contract and protect the most needy through such decisive actions as the creation of a European Labour Authority, such as the approval of the framework of directives for quality jobs, and also through the approval and creation of the European Unemployment Benefit Scheme, which would complement our current national schemes.

Four: It is a priority to culminate this feminist Europe that we are pushing through. To achieve that, I propose and proposed to the European Parliament on 15 January the adoption of a binding European Union Gender Equality Strategy. Binding, so as to combat the gender gap, the higher unemployment rate and insecurities predominantly suffered by female workers on our continent.

Five: This is a cross-cutting target, like gender equality, and I believe that we must remain at the forefront in the fight against climate change. We must comply with the Paris Agreement, which is undoubtedly the most important challenge we face at this time since none of the others I have mentioned so far can be resolved if this is not resolved. It is not just our scientific community that has been calling for this for some decades now, but also, in the main, the young people on the European continent. Our young people, of 14 or 15 years of age, are taking to the streets each Friday to call for a sustainable world, a sustainable Europe. But I also believe that this represents a great opportunity for economic transformation, for job creation, which is being called for by the business community and the private sector.

This economic transformation and ecological transition must go hand-in-hand. And, in my opinion, it is time to push through a Green New Deal at a European level, capable of shaking up the economy with sustainable industries and jobs, and a high added value thanks to innovation and knowledge. In short, a new deal that allows us to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda quicker and better.

Six: We must tackle the migratory challenge from a dual perspective; from an internal perspective by providing orderly, and I wish to stress "orderly", and supportive, and I also wish to stress "supportive", protection to those immigrants that need Europe. We cannot allow a perverse emphasis to take hold on this matter that solely and exclusively focuses on illegal migration. And this problem must be tackled from an external perspective by placing cooperation and also bilateral dialogue with the countries of origin and of transit and development aid with Africa on the front line of action of the European Union as a whole.

And seven. We must achieve, once and for all, a firm and effective external policy. To achieve that it is fundamental to have our own defence framework that provides for multilateral collaboration without dependence. I believe that it is also important to underline this. Multilateral cooperation but not dependence. In order to guarantee the security of our citizens, we must achieve a genuine European security and defence system. Although Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), which the President of the Federal Council of the European Movement mentioned earlier, represents a very important development - and that is at least the opinion I hold, in line with other European leaders - we must provide it with a genuine European Army.

We must build a much more flexible and less bureaucratic Europe in terms of decision-making. I can say this through my own experiences over these last 10 months. We take decisions by qualified majority that have a tremendous economic impact and yet, the tiniest decision on foreign policy must be adopted unanimously. In short, this is an anachronism that must be rectified.

Eight and last, but not by any means least, because this is the financial budget support that all these policies need. All these policies that will make Europe a much more useful and effective institution and project, in my opinion, to protect its citizens, as I said before, require an ambitious European Budget, which you are aware is one of the tasks facing us in the next term of office. Ambitious both in terms of size and content which rises to the times and reflects the new priorities, without abandoning traditional policies which, for example, are very familiar to Spain, such as the Common Agricultural Policy and the Cohesion Policies.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the road map I propose to protect Europe and thus ensure that Europe protects Europeans. It is necessary to offer our citizens the guarantee that none of these values is in danger. Nor can their well-being be in danger, and much less their opportunities and those of their loved ones.

And all of this will be decided upon on 26 May. No more and no less. These will be decisive elections for strengthening Europe of leave it languishing.

Now, 74 years on from the end of the Second World War, we are seeing shadows creeping over Europe that we thought we would never see again.

We are once again seeing those who proclaim the virtues of closed borders, those who advocate a lack of solidarity and even justify and accept poverty; those who desecrate Jewish cemeteries; those who extol hatred narrative; those who preach pure identities and culture, without mixed races or contamination.

In short, on 26 May, we must choose between one Europe and another. Between one that moves forward and another that moves backward; between one that integrates and one that excludes. Between one that unites to become stronger and another that separates and is consequently weaker. Between a Europe that found a way to imagine the world as it should be and rolled up its sleeves to make this a reality, and a Europe at loggerheads, that is antiquated and inward-looking.

In the Europe of 2019, it is true that groups have grown and spread that advocate positions that are very similar to Brexit. These forces appear today as allies and will form, I am convinced, a parliamentary group in the upcoming legislature in the European Parliament. But, in reality, if we look closely, they are united only by hatred, and by that alone.

I believe that Europe deserves for its project to last and become stronger. It deserves to continue to be the best place to live and the source of inspiration of political ideas, of social well-being, that helps the world develop in a much fairer fashion.

Together, we are the second largest economic powerhouse and the largest trading bloc on the planet. Individually, we must resign ourselves to living in a world designed by third parties, in which we would have no influential power. Withdrawal, in our times, is synonymous with defeat.

There is an awful lot at stake in these European elections. That is why we must step up our efforts and challenge the lies of the adversaries of Europe in the following manner:

Firstly, through pride; pride in knowing we defend the best European traditions and ideals, a secular legacy of liberty, dignity and tolerance ,Secondly, with enthusiasm, enthusiastic to represent a unique political project; unique in history because of its ambition, its magnitude and its achievements. And thirdly, together with pride and enthusiasm, the conviction of having the right answers for the challenges of the present and the future.

The writer and philosopher Henry David Thoreau said, and I quote this textually, that "If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them". I believe that this is the European ideal. When no-one dared build castles in the air, we built them, knowing that that was where the castles needed to be: built on high, spying on the world. They are safer, they are bigger and they are more comfortable.

In these decades of the European project, what we have done is lay the foundations under these castles to ensure a sound space. Like the European Union is nowadays. While it is true that problems have arisen, we should not be willing to demolish our great work that is this common European project or let it fall apart. It should be enough to strengthen these foundations and fill in any cracks.

Now is the time. Now is the time to protect Europe so that Europe can protect us. And, in my opinion, and I believe that everyone present here is convinced of this, regardless of the ideologies you represent, that Europe can always count on Spain in this challenge.

Thank you.

(Transcript edited by the State Secretariat for Communication)

Non official translation