UK State visit - President Sarkozy’s joint press conference with Mr Brown

State visit to the United Kingdom – Joint press conference given by M. Nicolas Sarkozy, President of the Republic, and Mr Gordon Brown, British Prime Minister¹

London, 27 March 2008

MR GORDON BROWN – I am delighted to be hosting President Sarkozy and his ministerial colleagues in this fantastic stadium. It is a modern symbol of the new French-British entente – what Nicolas has rightly called the entente amicale. I am grateful to Arsène Wenger and to the Arsenal Football Club for their warm welcome.

Nicolas, you have reminded us on this visit of your energy, your ideas, your insights into the great global challenges that we face, your vision for the future, and your commitment to the great relationship that exists between our two countries. No amount of rivalry on the football field last night can obscure our common interests, our shared values and our linked destinies. You set out yesterday in your powerful speech to the House of Commons and the House of Lords that our ideals and aspirations demand ever closer partnership. This State visit and this summit are, therefore, not just a reminder of a historic alliance, but they also signify a new stage in the dynamic relationship between Britain and France.

Together, we will address the challenges of this new global era. Together, we are well placed to do so. Our two countries are at the heart of what we want to be: an outward-looking and globally-focused Europe. We both favour a strong relationship with our American partners. We agree that only by working together can we confront the challenges we face from terrorism, climate change, poverty, disease and failed States. We have agreed that we will deepen and strengthen the partnership between our two countries. We will turn the entente cordiale into the entente amicale in the following ways of working together in the future.

We will now instigate quarterly meetings of senior officials of our governments to discuss issues that we have in common. We will have six-monthly summits of senior ministers to address the challenges in Europe and beyond. A regular annual summit will cover all the issues that are raised in these discussions. We will launch a taskforce to deepen our coordination on major issues of international concern, from the environment to how we cope with failing and failed States.

We will develop new mechanisms of ensuring greater coordination of policy before international meetings – the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund – as we deepen the links between individual ministers. We believe that, working together, France and Britain can be an even greater force for good in the world of tomorrow. If you like, this will be an entente formidable too.

We have agreed that we will vote together on the reform of the international institutions that we are proposing and will press our fellow members to make the reforms that are necessary.

Our ministers have had wide-ranging discussions, addressing these global challenges. We have discussed how we can achieve financial stability in a world of global financial turbulence and build an inclusive globalisation; how we can open trade between poor and rich countries; how we can act together on illegal immigration and climate change; how we can tackle conflict and broken-down States in the interests of a more stable world; and how our development policies can strengthen cooperation across the world. All our decisions are set out in a communiqué which is being issued in the next few minutes, and are a strong basis for the detailed work ahead.

We also agreed that we need Britain and France at the heart of Europe – a global Europe that is reforming, open, flexible and outward-looking and that retains a strong social dimension. Of course, this will be at the heart, as I know, of the French Presidency of the European Union (EU) that President Sarkozy will inaugurate in July.

Let me just draw attention to some of the specific joint actions that we have agreed to. We will press for a coordinated approach in the international financial community to disclosure and to dealing with the problems that now exist in write-offs and off-balance sheet activities, where new international standards have to be agreed as a matter of urgency.

We will promote a climate stability fund which will be resourced to help developing and emerging market countries make adjustments to alternative sources of energy.

We have agreed a common approach on Burma, and on Darfur, where we wish to speed up the introduction of the United Nations and African peace force and, at the same time, to ensure that the peace talks begin as soon as possible.

We are calling for restraint and for dialogue in China to tackle the problems that exist in Tibet.

We have agreed to pool our influence in the effort to reform the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the United Nations.

As announced a few minutes ago, we are together pooling our resources to make it possible for 16 million children in Africa to obtain education and to have a school and a teacher to go to in the years before the World Cup arrives in Africa in 2010.

We have agreed enhanced defence cooperation while recognising the centrality of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) role.

We have also agreed to step up our cooperation on immigration and to deal with the issue of making sure that we tackle the problem of illegality there.

We have agreed greater burden-sharing in Afghanistan, where we must do more to ensure that the fight against the Taliban is won.

We have agreed that we must do more also to tackle failed States, which is why we have a joint proposal for standby civilian peacekeepers, which is a new way by which the world can deal with conflict and reconstruction. We will have a joint UK-France conference later this year to share best practice on using civilian missions to stabilise and boost the rule of law in regions affected by conflict.

We have agreed to pool equipment resources with a new fund particularly for helicopters, to enable the equipment that is needed for allied and NATO missions.

This is a partnership that also pioneers changes for the future. We are pioneers because France and the UK are setting out a new agenda for cooperation today. We are setting out an agenda for joint action and for burden-sharing, and one whereby our two countries will cooperate ever more closely, month to month, on dealing with the great challenges that our global society faces.

President Sarkozy, it has been a privilege for us to have you and your wife in London today and for you to have visited the United Kingdom with what I believe will be understood to be an historic visit from the President of France. Thank you very much.

THE PRESIDENT – Ladies and gentlemen, if I may, before answering your questions I’ll make just a few very brief remarks because yesterday I had the privilege and honour of addressing the representatives of the British Parliament, I wouldn’t want to inflict a whole preliminary speech on you repeating what I said in my address yesterday, since my views haven’t changed between yesterday afternoon and today.

I’d like to begin by thanking Gordon Brown for our exemplary cooperation. We’ve known each other for several years. Gordon Brown was one of the best finance ministers Europe has known, he held that responsibility for ten years. He did a remarkable job serving the British economy. In actual fact, ever since he’s been at 10 Downing Street and I’ve been President of the Republic, we’ve been working hand in hand. We’re working hand in hand because, on every problem, our views are extremely similar, and when they aren’t, we narrow the gap in order to develop a common position. And, furthermore, I find the expression “global Europe” used by Gordon Brown very interesting. Moreover, I intend, when exercising the EU presidency, to confer closely with Gordon Brown so that Britain is involved in the French presidency. And so I’d like to thank you for your welcome, and also thank your wife, and say that, quite apart from my firm belief that France and Britain must work together, our personal relations make it much easier for us to do so, as does the understanding between our two teams who talk to each other daily.

The summit communiqué is substantive, I won’t comment on it; if you have questions I’ll answer them. Even more substantive are the promising prospects Prime Minister Gordon Brown and I talked about which we want to move forward on, which we’re working on in order to gear this partnership between Britain and France to the future. There are a lot more issues on which, it seems to me, we can do more.

You will understand too that I want to thank The Queen for Her invitation. And more widely the British people for the countless manifestations of friendship they have shown my wife and me. Of course, if by any chance you have any questions, I’d be delighted, alongside the British Prime Minister, to try and answer them.

Q. – We have heard the talk from the French President here of a stronger partnership and from you, Prime Minister, too, but many people will know there are historic tensions on issues like NATO, the reform of the EU, and free trade and protectionism. President Sarkozy has come here and has flattered and charmed Britain. Will both sides feel as good the morning after the night before?

MR GORDON BROWN – Yes, because we share the same vision about the future of Europe. I believe that Europe has to be a global Europe. It has to look out to the rest of the world. I believe an open and reforming Europe can make a huge difference as a global force for good. We discussed those four areas where Europe can make a huge difference. With Britain and France at the centre of Europe, we can change things for the future:

The first is a global approach to the economy, where we are agreed about the changes that need to be made in our international institutions and in how we supervise and set standards for the international economy.

We have agreed on changes in the global environment and how we can lead from Europe in making possible a new climate change agreement.

We have agreed on the security issues where we need to play a part together, which is why we have been looking at how we can deal with conflict prevention in some of the failed States and why civilian and standby forces can match the military power that NATO has.

At the same time, we have agreed, as you saw a few minutes ago, that we will work together to bring rich and poor countries together. That is why the initiative for Africa for 2010 is so important: to send a signal to Africa as it hosts the World Cup that we will work with them to ensure that every child has the right to education.

This is a shared vision of a global Europe and I am in no doubt that the French Presidency of the EU will be a historic one which will move forward this agreed agenda which President Sarkozy has been leading for many years.

THE PRESIDENT – Listen, frankly, on Africa and the need for its development, and for peace in Darfur – Bernard Kouchner will correct me if I’m wrong – our positions are the same. On the climate, our position is exactly the same and we need the British to convince the Americans to go as far as us.

On the transparency of the financial markets, I refer to our meeting at the end of January in London and hope you will organize a new one in October. We are of the same mind. There has to be transparency. On the need to give ourselves international institutions for the twenty-first and not the twentieth century, we’re of the same mind.

On immigration we’ve understood that we had to work together.

Listen, that already makes five areas of complete agreement. It’s not a matter of a one-night stand. It can even go beyond breakfast. And I’m convinced that if we stayed another night, we’d still be in agreement on all this.

But let’s come to the areas of misunderstanding or disagreement. This is important too. First of all, the issue of free trade and protectionism. I told Gordon Brown that France is for free trade, the market economy and globalization. And I also told him that we wanted reciprocity. I think that here, perhaps, you can say that we each took a step towards the other, OK. When you discuss, it’s better for each of you to take a step towards the other rather than each sticking to his own position. He wants globalization; he’s right because globalization brings benefits to the world. But we want reciprocity because we want fair competition. We totally agreed here, including on the issue of global Europe – we’d already talked about it when Gordon Brown was Chancellor of the Exchequer. I was for Europe, full stop; he was for globalization and we find common ground on a global Europe, i.e. I believe that Gordon is persuaded that with Europe we will have more influence on the way the world is organized, and I went some way towards him by saying that Europe was in favour of being global.

SIMPLIFIED TREATY

Let me add, and I’d like to say this very sincerely, that what Gordon Brown is doing at the head of the British government for Europe with the process of ratifying the simplified treaty is something that will benefit the whole of Europe. He’s doing it with courage, with loyalty to his 26 other partners and, believe me, I’m not the only one in Europe to appreciate Gordon Brown’s attitude on this matter. I’m perfectly calm – I’m not ignoring the fact that he’s Labour and I’m not – but what he’s done had to be done. And nor am I forgetting that if everyone doesn’t ratify the simplified treaty – I put my whole heart into getting it – there won’t be one. Thanks to him, Europe, I hope, will be able to move forward. And I said this to the representative of the Opposition as well as the representative of the Liberal Party. It’s not for me to engage in politics in Britain. But I’ve nevertheless the right, like the other partners, coming from a country which voted "no", to say this and do so very sincerely.

NATO/DEFENCE EUROPE

Finally, on NATO, I’m going all over the world saying that we need NATO and we need Defence Europe. And that, as I see it, Defence Europe isn’t a substitute for NATO. It isn’t one or the other, it’s both. What Gordon Brown and I have proposed is far more than a single summit. It’s for our two peoples, our two societies to reflect together. When you scratch the surface a little and go into the substance of the issues, you realize that we can have common positions.

Now, there are still the financial issues, there’s still the agricultural issue – we’re going to talk about them. What is this method which would have us never talk about the tough questions? We’ve chosen the opposite: to talk about them in order to get agreement. I think I can show that it’s a robust alliance. It is especially robust since it’s being built between people. And I know perfectly well that a French president has the historical responsibility of continuing a friendly partnership with the Germans, because this is important. But I’ve always said too that it wasn’t enough in a 27-member Europe, that we needed the British. I’ve seen some articles talking about a strategic change. Yes, there’s a strategic change, we want to work hand in hand with the British. But that doesn’t mean that there is any less Franco-German understanding, it’s always present. Similarly, I gather that relations between Angela Merkel and Gordon Brown are excellent. When I come to London, I’m not alone, there’s Angela too. It’s today’s Europe, we’re trying to take it forward.

Q. – You have already spoken about defence cooperation and, in your declaration, you talk about dialogue on nuclear deterrent. How far could that go? Could Britain consider its next-generation nuclear weapons being part of a collaborative project with the Force de frappe or would there always be a necessary commitment to the American nuclear programme, or would that sort of approach even be acceptable to the French?

MR GORDON BROWN – We work very closely with our American partners on our nuclear programme, which has always been very much understood. What we have been talking about this morning is how, by acting together, we can push forward the process of nuclear disarmament and, particularly, prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons around the world. I think we are at a critical moment as we look forward to a new Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and we worry about countries like Iran potentially acquiring nuclear weapons. What we have been talking about is whether we can tighten the rules about supply of nuclear materials. It is easy to placate on occasions those who possess nuclear weapons, but we need to know about who is supplying them. At the same time, I discussed with President Sarkozy the idea that Britain has put forward, which is the idea of a uranium bank or bond to say to States that we will help them get civil nuclear power as long as they continue to renounce, under the terms of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the idea that they will become nuclear weapon powers. These are the ideas around how, by cooperating together, we can progress nuclear disarmament generally. We both made decisions, as you know, about lessening the number of missiles in recent years, which is one of the ways that, together, we are cooperating in that process.

Q. – Mr President, you said how much you want Britain to play a fuller role in Europe and how Europe needs Britain. Do you think that Britain can ever play that full role as long as it remains outside the single currency?

MR GORDON BROWN – We have always said that the terms on which Britain could join the single currency have never been met. We have done regular surveys on this and it has not been appropriate for us to join. That remains the position of the government and we continue to assess the matter.

THE PRESIDENT – I’ve always thought we needed the United Kingdom in Europe because it opened up Europe to the world. Let me add that the United Kingdom and France account for two thirds of Europe’s defence effort. So, and this is important, we need to work with those who are like us. Now, it hasn’t escaped my attention that you aren’t in Schengen, that you aren’t in the euro area and that opt-out clauses have sometimes been negotiated – these are facts. It’s not for me to express a view on this. But it doesn’t give me the sense that we need less of the United Kingdom, but more. This is what I tried to say to Parliament yesterday afternoon. You, British friends, you want another Europe. It’s easier to build the other Europe with you inside it than with you on the outside. And it’s a mark of friendship and trust to tell you that if you are inside Europe you will have more chance of getting it to shift, develop in line with your ideas, than if you are on the outside. This is why you have to ratify the simplified treaty.

Now it’s not for me to opine on British domestic policy, but we’re keen to work with you. I’ll tell you why: because I come from a country, I’m president of a country where there was a 55% "no" vote and, moreover, three days before the second round [of the presidential election] I had pledged that there wouldn’t be a referendum. I have perhaps some credibility when I say that we need the British to get Europe to shift, and to shift it towards more political, more concrete content, because you know – this is another point Gordon Brown and I agree on – the simplified treaty isn’t an end in itself, it’s a means. And it’s now for us to flesh out this European policy, so that the British, like the French, say to themselves: "Ah yes, what they’re doing is useful to us in our daily lives". It’s easier for us French to do battle on these ideas and to get the others to shift their positions if you British are fully wholeheartedly inside Europe, and you are helping us and we you. And I believe it’s absolutely essential for things to be like that. I think everyone is capable of hearing and understanding this, even though every country has its own history, constraints, fears and hopes. It isn’t we French, whose "no" in the referendum has immobilized Europe for a number of months, or even years, who are going to criticize the British for any concerns you may be expressing on Europe. We’ve overcome them. And we are very keen for you to do so too in order to transform Europe.

BOYCOTT OF BEIJING OLYMPICS/TIBET

Q. – Should the leaders of major democracies like Britain and France now boycott the opening ceremony in Beijing as a result of what is going on in Tibet? Should you go further and encourage your athletes to consider boycotting the entire Games?

THE PRESIDENT – On this boycott issue, I note that the Dalai Lama himself isn’t calling for one, nor is he calling for Tibet’s independence. I note that none of the 27 EU countries has asked for one or proposed one. That answers your question. For the rest, our views are the same and we were shocked by what’s happened in Tibet. And we’ve made our sincere concern known, each doing it in our own way, but, basically, it was the same concern. Third point, we both think the only solution is the resumption of the dialogue between the Chinese authorities and the Dalai Lama in the framework of respect for Chinese territoriality. For the rest, we also agree – while we each have our own specific problems. Personally, I shall be EU President at the time of the opening ceremony. So I have to ascertain what the others think before deciding whether or not I’ll go to the opening ceremony.

Second thing: I very much hope that the remaining months are going to be used – isn’t that so Bernard Kouchner? – to calm the situation. And I shall wait and see how the situation in Tibet evolves before saying whether or not I’m going to the opening ceremony and whether there are grounds for taking other initiatives. Our British friends have another problem which I perfectly understand: they are the next organizers of the Olympic Games. So the torch is going to be passed to them. This has nothing to do with any political difference between us, it’s simply that they will be responsible for organizing the Games following the Beijing ones. For the rest, that’s our position. I believe it’s a reasonable and firm one and that at the same time our goal isn’t to have a China clinging to an instinctive nationalist identity-based reaction. And everyone has to understand this. We want to defend human rights, religious rights, rights of all minorities and we don’t want to have a China clinging to, falling back onto an instinctively nationalist reaction. So there you have our position, I think we feel very much the same way.

MR GORDON BROWN – We will not be boycotting the Olympic Games; Britain will be attending the Olympic Games ceremonies. At the same time, the President has said that the Dalai Lama has not called for a boycott of the Olympic Games. The main point that President Sarkozy made is the right one: that, in the next few days and weeks, not only should we be calling for an end to violence, but calling for restraint on all sides. It is absolutely important to recognize that this can be solved only through reconciliation and dialogue. The Premier of China has already made it clear that the Chinese authorities would be prepared to talk to the Dalai Lama subject to two conditions that I believe the Dalai Lama can meet: the renunciation of violence and the absence of a call for full independence for Tibet. There is a basis there for moving forward but, of course, there must be an end to violence and there must be restraint on all sides.

CAP REFORM

Q. – Mr President, the “breakfast after the night before” brings us to the Common Agricultural Policy and what is on the table. There are massive differences, are there not, between our approaches to the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. Our Prime Minister has spoken of wanting to get rid of all direct subsidies by 2020; will you commit to drastically reducing tariffs and subsidies, and fundamental reform of the Common Agricultural Policy as you take over the presidency?

THE PRESIDENT – On this matter, I have never said that we had concluded our discussions, but you don’t often hear a French president saying: let’s talk about it instead of clashing over it. I’m going to look at things from your point of view. Do you think that when it comes to food safety what the British consumer is asking for is so different from what the French consumer is asking for? You’ve had your own crisis, you in Britain, and we’ve had one too. Can’t we come to agreement on something? On the need to give European consumers meat and farm products whose traceability we are sure of? What’s the use of imposing rules on farmers, on European stock farmers, which would be got round by importing into Europe products coming from countries which don’t comply with any of these rules – this is a point we can discuss. We can also discuss the subsidies if we also discuss prices and Community preference. And I’m convinced that it’s very important for agricultural countries, like France, and those which are a bit less agricultural, like Britain, to agree to get round a table so that they can understand each other – because basically it’s the same market – and try to map out common policies, rather than one side complaining about the British rebate – it’s only fair for me to talk to you about it since all my questions are from the British press – and the other complaining about farm subsidies. So I think it’s more intelligent on our part to say: look, it’s a tough problem – it’s not just been one for a few weeks, a few months – let’s put it on the table and try to understand one another. Will we find a solution? We’ll see! But if we don’t talk to each other, how can we do so? And on food safety I think that we can find some common ground.

SYRIA/LEBANON

Q. – Mr President, tomorrow there’s an Arab summit which two of your friends, the King of Saudi Arabia and President Mubarak, are staying away from. Is there a common European position on Syria? Does Mr Brown share your position on Syria and Lebanon? Is it a priority for Britain as it is for France?

MR GORDON BROWN – Yes, indeed.

THE PRESIDENT – Listen, you say there are two countries refusing to participate, they aren’t just any countries: Egypt has 76 million inhabitants, that’s quite something, and Saudi Arabia has 26 million and is Guardian of Islam’s two Holy Places. When these two countries decide not to attend a summit it means something. And I think they’re right, because Syria has gone too far. And a number of us have sent very clear messages to the Syrian President. Lebanon is a free country, an independent country. Lebanon doesn’t need another country trying to manage her affairs for her. This isn’t a French or British concept, it’s a democratic one. The Lebanese should be left in peace; and the fact that countries with leaders as wise as those of Saudi Arabia and Egypt decide not to come because this summit is taking place in Damascus sends a message which I think President Bashar al-Assad would be well advised to heed. It isn’t Western countries, it isn’t the French, it’s his Arab brothers who are telling him “enough’s enough”. And I’m very pleased, moreover – and I’ll end with this –, that on such an important issue people can clearly see that this isn’t a problem between the West and the East, between Arabs and the others and that a number of Arab leaders are saying “enough’s enough”. I hope I’ve been clear.

MR GORDON BROWN – All of us are worried about the condition of Lebanon and about the inability of the Lebanese to form a government as a result of what has been happening. All of us are worried about potential interference in Lebanese affairs by the Syrians, which is why these concerns are being expressed not only by us, by America and by Europe, but by members of the Arab world in such an obvious way in the last few days.

AFGHANISTAN/FRENCH CONTRIBUTION

Q. – Mr President, the leaders of the Opposition in France are protesting this morning over that fact that you talked about a possible increase in the number of troops in Afghanistan (…). But above all, the President of the National Assembly, M. Bernard Accoyer – who belongs to the majority [party] – is asking for the increasing of the French contingent in Afghanistan to be referred to the French Parliament. What’s your reaction?

THE PRESIDENT – First, I said yesterday that I didn’t want the Taliban back in Afghanistan. I hope the French Opposition leaders share my opinion. I also said yesterday that a failure in Afghanistan would be a disastrous message to send to the world and the terrorists. I hope the Opposition leaders share this view. As regards the debate, I’ve personally spoken to the President of the National Assembly about it and am keen for it to take place. Before leaving [Paris], Bernard Kouchner in fact said we would organize it before the Bucharest summit. Let me add that I want the Opposition leaders to draw the conclusion that my proposed reform of the Constitution has to be passed as a matter of urgency since under it the government is required to inform Parliament on all defence matters. (…) Finally, I have laid down a number of conditions for increasing our participation – and I believe, moreover, that here too Gordon Brown and I are in full agreement – in the letter I sent to our NATO partners. We need a strategy because, like Gordon Brown, I think the victory in Afghanistan can’t be only a military one. So my answer is very clear: “yes” to the debate. Without any reservations.

MR GORDON BROWN – At the moment, more than 40 countries are working for a peaceful settlement there and supporting the democratically elected Afghan government. It is very important to recognise that, without the support of all 40 countries – and I am very grateful for what President Sarkozy has said about his commitment to action in Afghanistan – the Taliban would be back in power, al-Qaida would be finding further bases for their activities and five million girls who have managed to get education as the result of the return of government to Afghanistan would not be allowed in school and girls’ education would be banned for the future.

This is an important commitment to Afghanistan by the whole of the world and I am very grateful that President Sarkozy has made the offer that he has. At the same time, however, all countries have a responsibility to share burdens, which is why, at the NATO summit in the next few days, we will be discussing how other countries can also play their part in ensuring that we have the resources in terms of manpower and equipment in Afghanistan in the years to come.

FRANCO-BRITISH RELATIONS

Q. – Mr President, yesterday, before both Houses of Parliament, you set out a very flattering view of the prospects for Franco-British friendship, what you no longer called the entente cordiale but the entente amicale. Do you believe that the general public in both countries are ready to follow you in this new phase of the relations between our two countries?

THE PRESIDENT – They don’t need to follow us, because they’ve preceded us. Frankly, the hundreds of thousands of young French in London didn’t wait for me to deliver a speech before coming here, nor did all the Britons buying properties in France wait for Gordon Brown’s signal. So, you see, I rather get the feeling that it’s we who are following our peoples rather than vice versa.

MR GORDON BROWN – There has never been greater cooperation between France and Britain as there is now. As Nicolas has just said, that is at a level where people are travelling freely between Britain and France. Many British people live in France and many French people live in Britain, each of us learning from each other and what we are achieving. That is why cooperation at the political level is absolutely essential.

(…)

Q. – You just mentioned the EU. Recent talks indicate that the UK government supports Turkey joining the EU, but it appears that France is not in favour. What discussions have you had on Turkish accession to the EU?

MR GORDON BROWN – Everybody knows that there is a process at work. That process has to run its course and we have to see how it works things out. That is what is happening at the moment. Talks are taking place.

Thank you all very much for coming, and thank you, President Sarkozy./.

¹ Source of original English text (statements by Mr Brown and questions in English): 10 Downing Street