This transcript was automatically generated and may contain errors.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Before we move to the Q&A, we skip one important part at the start of the readout which is actually the summary of the other, the other points that we discussed.

We were really excited to, present you the police reviews.

So at the end of the Q&A, commissioner will, will, explain also the other points that were,

given and discussed already, two days during the college.

But before we do this, we will take a few questions. We'll start here in the room, Gerardo. Thanks, Guillaume, Gerardo Morales from Politico.

The, this new design for, for the pre-enlargement, As the commissioner mentioned, there are front runners, and the others, but also in the front runners, there are targeted, arrangements for Ukraine, so Are you,

are you not afraid that all these layers between front runners and the others and even among the front runners could actually end up disappointing everyone on the other side because you mentioned the,

the reverse membership actually disappointed member states and you got rid of, so.

Is there a risk that these different layers will actually disappoint the EU hopefuls? The opposite will happen.

Naming those frontrunners means that they have delivered,

and some of them under very, very difficult conditions.

We have heard for many years that we have forgotten in the European Union about the Western Balkans.

Two of the frontrunners are from the Western Balkans, and they could motivate all the others.

We have, for the first time ever since we are enlarged that we are negotiating with a country at war which is delivering,

and we have another country, which is Moldova,

which has proven in 5 elections and the referendum that they are firm on the.

European path,

even if Russia has invested hundreds of millions of euros to bring them in this way.

Of course we are aware that some of the countries will see themselves where we are now.

But for instance, when I was speaking about the road maps, they are actually there for everybody,

but it only makes sense for those who are so much advanced that it makes sense to do a road map.

I would compare this with a car, you know, if the car is not running.

It makes no sense if we push them from behind and the motor is not running,

and the motor can only run if there is fuel, and the fuel are the reforms in the country.

Once again, I think the opposite will happen.

It will show it is possible if you work hard and if you work on the commitments you have given when you have gotten the country a candidate status. Sure. I'm from.

I'm going to put my question in French. Please use a headset if you. Need interpretation.

You Have not Indicated or defined what associate membership in the European Union could be a status mentioned by von der Leyen recently in the European Parliament,

and I put the question because if you had defined what that means,

that could be of interest to the candidates who are less in a hurry,

perhaps Serbia for instance.

I mean, for it, a full membership might be difficult,

and Bosnia Herzegovina as well, very complicated for them to become full members.

So, so are you going to add this, associate membership status which could be of interest to some candidates? Thank you.

There are Two ways our European Union can get stronger.

One weighs on the strain of the enlargement.

We have experiences from the past enlargement that every enlargement has made us stronger in different ways.

The other part is new partnerships,

and what the President was talking about in her Soto on the associated membership for Canada.

Means very simple what can we offer to the maximum for a country which is non-European?

Meaning Canada is not fulfilling one of the most important criteria. There are actually two.

It has to be a state and from Europe.

That's why we want to see what is possible outside of the scope of the full membership.

For the rest,

we are very open to going on with all the countries who have committed when they got the status to go on.

But as you know, For the time being, the European treaties do not enable us to have associated membership. Thank you. I have one more question here. Thank you. It's Daniel Weder with the Luxembourg Public Radio.

So when it comes to the safeguards you just described, I was wondering once they would be in place, what would happen,

like it did before if it's not a new member, but an old one,

vetoing, blocking decisions taken before, not respecting the rule of law. Will there be new approaches?

Or will it just be the same because then it would be in a situation that we would treat the new members differently than the old ones,

which is not what you want.

Which I can understand, but speaking generally on the safeguards, they will only come in place,

and this is the same for the existing Member States and for the newcomers if they go against or do the big breaches,

meaning against the rule of law, against democracy and against our values.

There is no difference between the Member States.

Which already have a mechanism of Article 7, and of course now for the newcomers.

When you speak about the new generation of the safeguards, we learn a lot from the past and we want to contribute to the development that know more than what we have experienced in the past,

if there will be willingness among the Member States to discuss further. Because we are also open. Thank you.

We'll take a few questions online, then we'll come back to the room. We'll take questions from David Carretta.

Yes, thank you very much, David Carretta Radio Radical Italian Radio. I hope you can hear me well.

A question on Ukraine, because all new member states would be equal except Ukraine.

You, you mentioned the different treatment for the agricultural sector,

which means targeted, arrangements for sensitive products.

Which are quite many right now, from poultry to grain, wheat, and so on,

honey, and second, they will not receive direct payment from the CLPs.

So I would like to have a clear answer from you.

Why do you have Choose this this path. And are the agricultural lobbyists in Europe.

So frightening for you to treat new member states in a different way. Thank you.

Join the EU, it will be an equal Member States.

Once we discuss about the accession treaty, we will bring in the accession treaty the provisions.

It will be at that point important for the Member States and for Ukraine to be able to conclude the negotiations in general and for the accession treaty. Ukraine.

And can become a member of the EU,

Ukraine will and can become a part of the European agricultural policy,

under which conditions this will be discussed.

We also have to protect the farmers in the European Union,

and we are already discussing this subject with Ukraine. Thank you. We'll take another question online from Ivan.

Ivan from the radio and television of Montenegro. Thank you, Guillaume. I hope that you can hear me.

I have a question about the roadmap for Montenegro.

Taking in consideration that Montenegro is on track to complete the negotiations by the end of the year.

Will this roadmap define concrete deadlines for conclusion of negotiations or signing the accession treaty with Montenegro. Thank you so much. Like you coming from Montenegro.

As we see, Montenegro has invested a lot of energy and has delivered a lot, so it is our opinion, based on this,

that Montenegro could finish the negotiations, the technical part, at the end of this year or at the beginning of next year.

The working group is already preparing the accession treaty, so if everything goes OK,

also with the dynamic in the member states.

It is possible that Montenegro will then sign the accession treaty next year,

and then it depends how long the ratification process will go on.

The experiences are from 1 to 2 years,

so we support in the European Commission the vision of Montenegro that the country will become the 28th member.

Of the EU in 2028 if it delivers as it has delivered until now,

but mentioning now roadmap for Montenegro, this is a clear sign that there will be different road maps. Montenegro is at the end.

The other countries have not opened all the clusters yet,

so it is a clear sign that the road maps which we will introduce at the end of October will be different for those four countries.

We'll take one more question online and then we'll come back to the room. We'll take the question from Alexandra. We duty. Thank you, Guillaume, for the opportunity.

Commissioner, you proposed that new member states should not oppose future enlargement decisions over bilateral disputes,

but bilateralization is already a problem in the current enlargement process.

How does this proposal solve the problem if it does not apply to existing Member states,

and how do you reconcile this with your statement that there should be no two tier membership and that newcomers must enjoy exactly the same rights as existing Member states? Thank you so much.

Thank you, Alexandra, they will be enjoying the same rights,

and there is a big distinction about the other part of the safeguards and these safeguards.

We are proposing that the newcomers will On a voluntary basis. Do a special declaration.

This will not be a part of the accession treaty.

That they will not use veto in the enlargement process when it is about the bilateral issues. So this is the difference.

It is we propose, it is on the newcomers if they will accept this. Thank you. Welcome back here in the room. Thank you. Mr. Commissioner, let's go back to road maps.

I'm happy to know that issues like agriculture, for example, has been solved, or at least that there is a way to solve it.

What about the country being currently at work?

How can a roadmap conjugate the fact of lack of elections and the rule of law and democracy,

just to quote an example. Thank you. You have named a very important point.

There is a big difference between 2 or 3 members of this 4 groups and Ukraine.

This is a country at war,

so probably we are still working on this roadmap for Ukraine will be a bit different.

And as I have said before, the closer we get to the end of the accession process or the more the steps are done in the technical negotiations like opening clusters and then reaching the eyebars and later on closing the chapters,

the easier it would be how actually the whole situation then put down.

The conditions in the accession treaty will look like.

I hope that the war in Ukraine will stop soon.

We all, I know, wish this, but speaking about Ukraine.

I was answering before, you know how countries are delivering differently.

This country is really active on 3 levels, if I simplify it.

The first level is fighting for the survival.

The second level is The accession process where they have to deliver, and the third level is delivering on the reforms which sometimes are the same and the accession process,

sometimes not, and this they have to do to get our money for the Ukraine facility.

There is no other country which is doing that much for being able to join the European Union. I'm sure we will find a solution. I have one question here.

High Commissioner, we begin with the Austrian newspaper, The Press and the newsletter La Matina open,

I'm a bit baffled by the assumption that underpins your communication that there is actually still momentum for enlargement policy because if you look at the wider political picture in Europe,

you have the impression that actually that momentum has completely faded away.

Member states are struggling with huge fiscal crisis. They are struggling with an energy crisis.

They won't very likely even be in a position to agree on the MFF until the end of the year.

Next year you will have 4 very complicated national elections, and I would assume that neither of these elections are going to be very propitious to or very, very, you know,

supportive to to the enlargement momentum, and even the very pro-European president of France now,

who will be out of office next year can decide how he would ratify the Montenegrin accession treaty.

So where does the optimism stem from that enlargement is still a thing? This sounds a bit like preparing for.

I don't know for a war that actually is already lost in the first place, I tell you very well where my optimism is coming from,

and this is for the best results ever in 1 year in the last 25 years,

what we have achieved in the accession process.

It is true that I am responsible for the technical part of the negotiations, but we can't move on without the member states.

And all the member states are contributing that we have opened or closed more chapters in the 1st 9 months of this year than in any previous years in the last 25 years.

This is for me, the proof that the Member States,

even many of them are having problems in their own countries, are supporting this.

I am traveling a lot to the Member States when we discuss all this question, and it is very,

very clear they are supportive of the enlargement, but they want to see it merit based.

But it depends where in Europe, they also are a way of geopolitics.

What we do with this report today is give the answer to how geopolitics and merit based can walk hand in hand.

Some people say that this is not possible. I don't agree with this.

Geopolitics is telling us why enlargement matters and why this should be our priority.

Merit based and this is so crucial to us, merit based speaks about the conditions and who.

And when can come to the end of the accession process, and the Member States are supportive of this. We'll have a discussion, yeah. Thank you, Karine Sargsyan factortivi Armenia.

The Armenian Government hasn't ruled out applying to join the European Union.

If Armenia applies, could it benefit from the great detailed integration measures in today's package,

even before becoming a candidate country, and what conditions would it need to meet?

Package in this pre-accession review,

we don't speak about the special packages of support.

It is a big roadmap to us inside the European Union to get ready and to give the signal to the candidate countries that we are ready,

that if they deliver, we are delivering. And we are also delivering for Armenia.

It is the countries also in my portfolio since I'm responsible for the Eastern Partnership.

The country is really moving a lot towards the European Union, you know, for the time being,

the only country where we negotiate for the visa liberalization,

the country where we are helping a lot because Russia has prohibited imports from.

Your country and we have,

with the help of the Member States and the European Parliament adopted the ATMs so that they can export 80% of their products without customs to the European Union and of course there is also a special package for the economic development in the country.

Go back online quickly for a few last questions. We'll take the question from, Andrew, Andrew Gray. OK, it's not working.

OK, we'll move, we'll take the question from Dusan. No.

You need to click Need to, OK, you need to press the speak button. Hello, can you hear me now? Thank you. So Dushangaic, Serbian television. Two quick questions on gradual integration.

Commissioner, you said that ambitious, plan for more structured and, more advantageous, concept of gradual integration would be presented,

soon, but, that, it should be conditioned on, sort of strategic alignment of the candidate country.

Given the state of, let's say, foreign policy alignment of Serbia, would this concept then apply to Serbia at this moment as,

things, stand, and, in view of the conditionality that you mentioned.

And secondly, could you, already now give us a hint, what kind of advantages this concept would actually offer to candidate countries, since we already know some of the advantages like SEPA,

and the possibility of, free, without roaming charges, using the, the phones and so on,

but what will be, Additional example of advantages that countries might enjoy. Thank you. Thank you.

The first question, the enhanced gradual integration only makes sense, as I said before, if the car is moving.

If the car is not moving or even backsliding or going back, it makes no sense. Regarding the second question, advantages.

We will do this country by country,

and this will also be part of this new concept of enhanced gradual integration. For the time being, and Mr.

Duchêne has named SEPA or roaming, which we have offered to all the candidate countries,

and the citizens are really appreciating this.

The new way which we will use in the gradual integration will be that we will sit down.

We will have a special gradual integration dialogues with each and every one of those 4 countries where we will see.

First, where they are so advanced that a little more help from us, also financially, could help them easier integrate into part of our system or subsystem,

and the second part will be very important, and this is also the novelty, where it is in our own interest.

Because it is strategically important to us, or it goes hand in hand with our goal of making Europe more independent,

then we will also invest and help the country to advance in this area. We have time for 2 more questions. We take quickly Catherine Feore. Hi.

Hi, so my question is about Article 7.

You said that it retains its central role in addressing serious breaches,

but what we've seen is that it has been extremely ineffective.

And in fact, you're standing in the European Parliament,

which was the or the institution that really pushed for it to be, to be used.

And yet that was in 2018, and it's, and again,

and it was it had nothing what happened to it.

It it made no progress in the General Affairs Council.

So it's been proven to be a very ineffective mechanism.

And when I look at the staff working document, I don't see any details on how you will make it more effective,

and how you can get, you know,

the Council on board because they seem to be unwilling, to, to make use of it.

And, in, again on this issue of, you don't want a two-tier system, well,

The institutional safeguard mechanism that you mention appears to be a sort of Article 7 light. How is it different from Article 7?

And how is it not a two-tier system to to suggest that it applies to accession state new members for 15 year period.

So if you could again give provide more details on that, I couldn't find anything in the staff working document. Thanks.

Regarding the safeguards already this week we will send to the Council the legal papers, how we see the safeguards,

and then we expect that discussion will be swift among the member states again regarding the two tiers.

The best would be that all the member states and the newcomers, meaning at that time.

Member States will go hand in hand with the rule of law, democracy, and values. Then we will need no safeguards. One point.

The second point is This 15 year transitional period has to be negotiated between the Member States and the country which wants to become a member of the EU,

meaning that only then, when it is negotiated,

it will become a part of the treaty and the regulation when the country will. We take one last question from Ikram. And thank you, thank you. Can you hear me? Yes, I always ask this question. I have technical problems in my life.

Commissioner, I would like to have your personal opinion, not of the, your colleagues at the college.

Will you use the model of associate member status for Canada which you are starting to develop for two unfortunate unfortunate countries from Western Balkans.

I'm thinking here about Northern Macedonia and Kosovo.

And eventually, for Bosnia as well, where the problems are from inside and in, in the case of, of Macedonia is one member that's outside Macedonia and Kosovo that's 5 countries,

inside the EU but outside of Kosovo, so Will you be ready to consider and,

and, and have a discussion with your colleagues?

Let's do something for those three countries who are not for a different reason.

Just hold back and do something temporary as you are going to do with Canada, which is, I think, a great inventive idea.

No, I wouldn't do this because there is a difference.

On the one hand, we have candidate countries who, because of different reasons,

are on the different levels of where they stay in the accession process.

One of them you have named doesn't have a candidate status yet,

meaning that This is really me speaking as Commissioner and as a person coming from this area of ex Yugoslavia.

It is important that we integrate Olof them. In the European Union.

One of the biggest mistakes in the past from the past is that we haven't been able to do this in the past,

and we are paying the price for this today.

So as long as they are candidates,

I will do everything possible that they will be able to become full members of the European Union. The last question here. Thank you, Georgoulis from Tabula Media.

Commission document reiterates that Georgia's accession is de facto halted.

If Georgian authorities, Georgian Dream proceeds to, proceeds with banning opposition parties in Georgia,

should we expect EU GGeorgia relations to move beyond has halted accession and into a fundamentally new phase,

and what would this mean in practice?

Should we expect any consequences for Georgian authorities?

And separately,

Georgia applied for EU membership alongside with Ukraine and Moldova and now is excluded from these front runners and is not going to receive accession roadmap.

Do you have any assessment for this divergence?

As you know, Georgia is a candidate country on the paper only. I regret this.

I would wish that Georgia, with the huge support of the Georgian people,

would be today at the same level as Moldova and Ukraine.

How we will proceed with the country depends mostly on how the member states will see the future of this,

but a lot of what is happening in the country now will be presented at the end of October in the enlargement reports.

You can imagine in which direction this will go.