This would take us to the top and not down

You have been one of the great actors of European construction and you are always a great activist witness. How respond you to those that the President of the Commission, José Manuel Barroso, denounced as "crisophiles"

By reminding them of what was acquired in fifty years since the Treaty of Rome, but also by explaining that, in view of the new reports of force in the world, Europeans must face three major challenges: globalisation, technological change and demography.

The basis of the contract is clear: sovereign countries agree to share the exercise of their sovereignty, in a community governed by law. It is a unique experience in history. Europe is a project for the future by its institutional philosophy. Others, such as Latin America and even Southeast Asia, begin to emulate.

Then why this breakdown of Europe Are new fears arising from enlargement

The lack of explanations and discussions has been evident with enlargement. How does not induce the accession of our citizens when it comes to Europe, to open arms to other European countries emerging from 50 years of night of communism This has not been explained, the no to the referendum on the Constitution proves it. But beyond the enlargement, three elements have played in France: anxiety about globalization, the addition of discontent from all layers of society and a democratic disenchantment. Many people don't believe that the policy can change things. This simple test explains the results of the referendum and can inform the evolution of French society.

What is the responsibility of President Chirac in a little dark balance

Since enlargement, French officials have not been listening and explanation work. It is even more serious, since forty years, polls show that about two-thirds of the French are favourable to European construction, which they see the opportunity for their country to pursue his path as a nation. There was break, due to certain excesses. To take two examples, it was possible to say that the Bolkestein directive was not good as such without the demonized. As it was possible to more comprehensive and open relations with the countries of the East.

Is the Constitutional Treaty rejected by the French not already exceeded

I have supported this Treaty because I support the institutionalization of the Charter of fundamental rights, a way to assert and apply our values. And because I found the system of decision making better than in the current treaties.

But I was against the use of the word "Constitution" because I knew that it would lead to a misunderstanding on the part of the French, the feeling that all the powers would be transferred to European level. As they tend to believe that everything which is not in France lies in the European Union...

What way out yourself

Judging by my experience as President of the Commission, which is one of the missions to achieve dynamic compromises, there is no miracle solution. What is wise, it is to move the two lines; one of the 20 countries that support the Constitutional Treaty and that of the 2 countries which said no. However, I have not yet the spark of the compromise. It is enough to see the prudence of the German Presidency...

Do you consider useful to vote again the French on the Constitutional Treaty

Common sense is that it queries a second time the French. This will require better listening and better explain what was intended to do in Europe. But, above all, need to remove the term "Constitution".

Could a social protocol to assure the French

The French must know that it takes a majority to adopt a European law. However, the current majority in the Union is more favourable to a market economy very liberalised to a regulated economy. It is closer to the ideas of the center-right as those of the Social Democrats which I am. This is not a Constitution that will change this state of affairs. The debate on the political field is needed. However, I think that, given the current situation, a social protocol should be added to that it will keep the current constitutional Treaty. But it will be necessary to fight.

That should be put

Could include the political will to move towards more convergence in living standards. Could there be the trebling of the credits of the Erasmus programme, which I launched in 1986. This would return boost youth, basement of the future Europe. Finally, the establishment of a minimum wage could be envisaged on condition that it is proportional to the wealth of each country. This would take us to the top and not down.

Wait for the French presidential election hope to move the lines

This make moving a... I would like that the French realize the European issue. Unfortunately, our political elites may give the impression of having in mind that a French Europe. Economic nationalism of our leaders, who are going to go down in flames the European Central Bank, is incomprehensible and harmful. Because this makes more difficult the approximation of the points of view. While Schuman, Giscard d'Estaing, Mitterrand had in mind a Europe based on a compromise allowing Europe to move forward and the France to preserve its essential interests and to strengthen its influence.

There is little chance that the social Europe, defended by the France, is supported by our partners

The social dimension is not absent from the building European: equality men-women, intended by the Treaty of Rome, the negotiations between the social partners that I've launched in 1985, the minimum working conditions and especially the economic and social cohesion, that is the solidarity between the more developed regions and regions experiencing difficulties: when I came to the Commissionin 1985, this policy accounted for EUR 5 billion in the European budget; Today, it represents 40 billion!

However, economic policy, employment, social security policy and the distribution of income are under national jurisdiction. Of course, can improve things. But the France does not have interest to transfer these skills at European level. We are a Europe United in diversity. The diversity of social models does not prevent us to move forward. But this is not enough to boost the countries that are part of the euro area.

They do not started themselves stalled

The report of the Delors Commission from 1989 provided a balance between the monetary pillar and the economic pillar. And in 1997, in the third stage of economic and Monetary Union, I have proposed in vain to the French authorities that next to the monetary stability pact, there is a Pact for the coordination of national economic policies. It is essential that the euro protects us, but also we boosts. No need to change the statutes of the European Central Bank. The problem is not the ECB, it is its counterpart, the coordination of economic policies.

What can the Ministers of economy and finance to more

But they do nothing! They talk, that's all. It should be that the European Commission is responsible for all three or six months to present a balance sheet of euro area economies and to propose what could be done to increase convergence, that is to maximize the value added by economic and Monetary Union.

Should we harmonize taxation policy

It is not possible, within a currency area participating in a project of political union, tolerate the fiscal dumping. The work began. It is to harmonize the tax on corporations, then the rate base would lead to a range of rates as it exists for the TVA. It is essential, if not speak more economic and Monetary Union.

If euro-zone Ministers decide on this point, it will have a ripple effect on countries outside the euro area

Perhaps, but the important thing is that economic and Monetary Union will become a true cooperation strengthened, managed as such. And that European citizens realize that when there is a global monetary disorder, the Union speaks with one voice and has his say. Who complains of the weakness of the dollar, low levels of Japanese and Chinese currencies I hear nothing and I wonder what is Europe.

Whenever a Minister of finance refers to the dollar, made to order by the President of the ECB...

Mr Trichet is not the arbiter of the elegance. Because, under the terms of the treaties, the Council of Ministers has its say on the foreign exchange policy.

Would a better coordination of the euro area countries sufficient to obtain higher growth

What each country needs to do for itself, Europe the will not to him. Just see in the euro area countries that were structurally adapted their economy and for growth and employment results far superior to ours. Between 1993 and 2005, the France experienced an average of 2.1 growth, while the European Union to 15 was 2.3, not to mention the Spain, at 3.6... Are you still making Europe the scapegoat for its internal problems... It reminds me of my childhood, when Horn were to type on the same. Our politicians love it. The result is not in the referendum.

Need for enhanced cooperation in areas other than the economy

European construction could advance because certain States were able to go further than others. What would Europe today without the Schengen Agreement on the Elimination of borders, or the euro

However, for me, the greater Europe can reasonably set fifteen years that three objectives: strengthening the area of peace, mutual recognition and security. create a framework for solidarity and sustainable development; stimulate cultural diversity. Europe is magnificent because of its diversity. For the rest, whether it's the currency, defence, certain common actions of foreign policy, be required for differentiation. If we do not want to do so, we stagnerons that the world will high speed.

Fifty years ago, the fathers of Europe wanted to get out of the paralysis of the negotiations between the Governments. Is not returned to too many intergovernmental

What has disappeared, is the Community method which was at the heart of the Treaty of Rome. With the Commission who is concerned about the European interest and which has the right of initiative. And with a Council of Ministers, in particular the Council of General Affairs, allowed to present options to the European Council, i.e. the heads of State and Government. This works today. The only positive aspect, including from the point of view of democracy, it is the progress made by the European Parliament, which has done a remarkable job.

Officials of the competition, the Commission, are often criticized. Their policy you think it balanced

Need to solve a difficult problem: how far should we apply the rules of competition to promote the consumer without weakening the position of European companies When I chaired the Commission, I am opposed to a majority who wanted to sanction Air France to the grants received from the French Government. This might do away with the company. I fought that he be given his chance. See the results today.

Are you in favour of a European industrial policy

The European industrial policy, it is the reasonable application of the rules of competition, a more active cooperation in research and innovation and of decisions taking into account the European interest in major sectors such as energy or transport. Everything is possible. Is avoid phrases such as "economic nationalism". Since then, the French become inaudible.

Should we stop enlargement to try to deepen the Union

Deepening will come for a new Treaty which will allow to better determine, by enhanced cooperation initiatives, starting with EMU. And finally the implementation in the countries of the former Yugoslavia, which has made the magnitude of the fathers of Europe: peace and mutual understanding between peoples. There there is the fear of war and on the other. As with us between 1945 and 1957. Are we doing enough to stop

Far push the frontiers of Europe. To the shores of the Bosphorus

I judge Europe how it meets the historical challenges. It did in its first three enlargements. The Europe of today is not what I had imagined to twenty-five years, but I am proud of this Europe-there.

For the Turkey, in view of the threat of war of the religions and ideology of whose protagonists reject the other because he does not think like them, a non-final would have been an error. I approved the European Council who said yes to negotiation. Step more, but not less. This gesture shows that "Christian world" does not turn back to the "Muslim world".