We have to be extremely strict on the implementation of Brexit so there is a common approach between member states. We must avoid a sector-by-sector or country-by-country approach, and ask the U.K. to be clear.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
It does not seem to me that the steps which would be needed to make Britain - and others - more comfortable in their relationship in the European Union are inherently so outlandish or unreasonable.
I worry about the direction of the U.K. and U.K. politics and governance in the event of a Brexit.
I don't want a tailor-made approach where the British have the best of two worlds. That will be too big an incentive for others to leave and kill the European idea, which is based on shared responsibilities.
The more the UK feels distanced from European construction the less others are able to benefit from the full influence of the many good things that the UK can help us all to achieve, and therefore there are many areas where I think it would be beneficial to have the UK fully at the table.
I would like a UK fully engaged in Europe, but I can't decide in place of the British. I see that for the moment they want to be more in retreat.
The U.K. is outward-looking, trade-oriented, growth-oriented, and we do not have enough of that storyline, that tradition, that culture within the European Union.
If the U.K. wants a commercial access treaty to the European market, the British must contribute to the European budget like the Norwegians and the Swiss do. If London doesn't want that, then it must be a total exit.
We want the United Kingdom to remain in the European Union.
I think the U.K. would be perfectly successful as a standalone country, part of the European marketplace like Norway and Switzerland but without the expensive E.U. bureaucracy.
We need Britain not only to stay in the E.U. but to be very active in it.