Women in the European Union still earn on average 16% less than men, a slight improvement from last year’s 16.2%. This year the European Equal Pay Day falls on 4 November. It marks the day when women symbolically stop getting paid compared to their male colleagues for the same job.
Ahead of this symbolic day, First Vice-President Frans Timmermans, Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs, Skills and Labour Mobility Marianne Thyssen and Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality Věra Jourová stated:
“It is 60 years since the equal pay principle was written into the European Treaties, and yet women across Europe still don’t see the laws matching the reality of their daily lives. European women still work for two months for free compared to their male colleagues and the progress is too slow.
While we have made some steps in the right direction in the past five years, more needs to be done and faster. Our citizens expect us to do better.
Nine out of ten Europeans – women and men – think that it is unacceptable that women are paid less than men for the same job.
Knowledge is power, and therefore, the more we can improve transparency around the underlying causes of the pay gap, the better we will be able to tackle it. The pay transparency is important, so we can detect cases of pay discrimination and the employees and customers can draw their own conclusions and take action. In fact, 64% of Europeans have stated that they are in favour of the publication of average wages by job type and gender at their company.
Pay transparency, combined with other solutions such as an equal distribution of caring responsibilities between women and men – enabled by new EU Directive on parental and carers’ leave – would help us tackle the root causes of the gender pay gap.
We therefore welcome the announcement of President-elect von der Leyen to table measures introducing binding pay transparency in the first 100 days of the new mandate.
We must continue to fight the gender pay gap, for a more effective workforce and for a more just society.”
Background
The factors behind the pay gap are multiple: women more often work part-time, they are confronted with the corporate glass-ceiling, they work in lower paid sectors or often have to take the primary responsibility for care of their families. One way to address these factors is to improve the work-life balance of working parents and carers. The Commission made a proposal to that end in April 2017, which was adopted by the European Parliament and the Council in January 2019.
Pay differences also depend on gender stereotypes and discrimination. The relative weights of these causes cannot be known without more pay transparency.
At EU-level, different initiatives have been taken during the past 5 years of the Juncker Commission. In 2014, the Commission adopted a Recommendation on strengthening the principle of equal pay between men and women through promoting concrete pay transparency measures, including the right to information, pay audit, pay reporting inclusion of equal pay issues in collective bargaining. The 2017 Report on the implementation of the Recommendation found insufficient implementation and effectiveness of the measures.
In November 2017, the Commission launched an EU Action Plan to tackle the Gender Pay Gap. The Action Plan takes a holistic approach and addresses all the different root causes of the gender pay gap, including by improving pay transparency.
Until now, €14.2 million of funding has been granted to projects combatting stereotypes, regard to career guidance and career choices, on women in decision-making and work-life balance, on closing gender gaps over the course of one’s life and on how to address the gap in employment, pay and pensions.
In 2018, the Commission launched an evaluation of the equal pay measures and is currently finalising the evaluation. EPSCO Council Conclusions from June 2019 call on the European Commission to actively follow up on the ongoing evaluation.
From January to April 2019, the European Commission conducted a public consultation to gather input from a broad range of stakeholders on the functioning and implementation of EU equal pay laws. The summary of the results is available online. The European Commission is now working on the evaluation of the ‘equal pay’ principle, as outlined as one of the deliverables in the Action Plan.
Moreover, the European Commission is publishing today an overview of national and European case law and good practices on equal pay, which are deliverables of the Action Plan under alerting and informing about the gender pay gap. They provide insights about functioning of the equal pay but also point to the shortcomings to the enforcement of equal pay principle in practice.
For more information
Webpage on the Gender pay gap, including:
Factsheet on gender pay gap
Factsheet on pay transparency
Report:  National cases and good practices on equal pay
Guide on European Court of Justice case-law on equal pay
Compliments of the European Commission

Freedom of expression, in all its forms, is the very essence of democracy. Only with a thriving, free and independent media landscape, we can hold governments, businesses and society at large accountable. And precisely for this fundamental right, far too often, journalists and media workers are attacked, persecuted, harassed, or intimidated for carrying out their work. Most journalists are not wounded in the heat of war coverage, but suffer violence in our immediate surroundings. In 2018 alone, 94 journalists and media staff were killed in work-related incidents as reported by the International Federation of Journalists. Hundreds more have been subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention without ever having been tried in a court.
Time and again, governments fail to protect journalists, hesitate to prosecute perpetrators or even perpetrate the crimes themselves. Impunity for these crimes multiplies their impact and erodes democratic societies by fuelling fear, mistrust, and anxiety.
Only last month we remembered the killing of Saudi national Jamal Khashoggi, whose case still awaits court handling, and the murder of Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia in the midst of Europe, proving that no region of the world is immune to such crimes. On this day we reiterate our commitment to combat impunity for crimes against journalists and to continue using all appropriate means possible to respect and protect freedom of expression and to ensure the safety of journalists and media workers.
The EU provides support and legal assistance via the EU-funded mechanism for Human Rights Defenders, a network that delivers fast response to human rights defenders under threat, including journalists. The EU also funds the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (CMPF) and its important Media Pluralism Monitor that continues to measure threats to media pluralism in the EU and in neighbouring countries and informs our policy-making processes. In 2019, the European Commission has earmarked a budget of more than €8 million to support projects geared at promoting quality journalism, cross-border cooperation between media professionals and self-regulatory bodies, as well as funding cross-border investigative journalism and protecting journalists under threat​. In many countries, we provide financial and expert support to foster protection of journalists, bloggers and media workers.
On this day dedicated to the end of impunity for crimes against journalists, we pay tribute to all those who lost their lives and suffered attacks in the exercise of their freedom of expression online and offline and stand by all those who have the courage to speak up for all of us.
Compliments of European Council

The European Council has adopted a decision to extend the period under Article 50.3 (of the Treaty on the European Union), in the context of the UK’s intention to withdraw from the EU.
The extension will last until 31 January 2020 to allow more time for the ratification of the withdrawal agreement. The withdrawal can take place earlier on 1 December 2019 or 1 January 2020, if the withdrawal agreement is ratified by both parties.
For the duration of the extension the United Kingdom remains a member state with all the rights and obligations set out in the treaties and under EU law.
The decision was taken unanimously by the European Council by written procedure, with the agreement of the UK. This agreement was set out in a letter from UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson to President of the European Council Donald Tusk. The European Council also agreed a declaration accompanying the decision.
 
Compliments of the European Council

Make no mistake about it, the latest version of Brexit is a very hard Brexit.
The UK Government has abandoned the legally binding commitment in the previous deal to align with EU regulatory standards to the greatest extent possible. That is now dropped in favour of a political aspiration.

The more the UK diverges from EU standards the greater is the likelihood that the EU will have to place tariff and other barriers in the way of UK imports to the EU, and now also to Northern Ireland. The problem will be particularly acute for agricultural goods.
The EU/UK trade negotiation has yet to begin, but I believe it will be both lengthy and difficult. This is a direct result of the “red lines” for Brexit chosen by the UK (no custom union membership, no single market membership and no ECJ jurisdiction). This was a legitimate choice for the UK to make, but the costs of the choice are yet to be revealed and understood. When they are, it will be too late to change course. 
Many in the UK say they just want to “get Brexit over with”. The impatience is understandable, but the truth is that agreeing the Withdrawal Treaty will not actually get Brexit “over with”. The additional bureaucracy will be permanent. If there is not to be a no deal crash out, the transition period will have to be much long than the end of 2020, because the trade negotiation will only be in its early stages by then.
The only way to get  the agony of Brexit over with, would be to revoke Brexit. There is little popular support for that, so Brexit will drag on and preoccupy British politics for years.
By choosing a harder Brexit than Mrs May, and agreeing that the controls will be in the Irish sea, Boris Johnson has chosen to prioritize the interests of  hardline Brexiteers in England over the interests of the DUP in Northern Ireland. Such a choice was inherent in Brexit, which is why it will remain a puzzle for historians to discern why the DUP chose to support Brexit with such enthusiasm in the first place.
 THE WORLD AFTER BREXIT
I would like to turn now to the world after Brexit, and about the European Union, of which we will continue to be a member and in whose success we will now have a disproportionate interest.
The world has become a much more unpredictable place than it was 10 years ago. The era of easy decisions may be over.
A European country, Ukraine, has been successfully invaded by it neighbour, Russia, breaking solemn undertakings that had been given. We have been reminded of the importance of defence.
There is widespread evidence of interference in elections and democratic processes by authoritarian regimes in other parts of the world. Voting software is being infected. Campaigns are being hacked. National rules on election spending can be circumvented via the social media.
The United States has created doubt around its defence commitments to Europe. It has walked away from its Kurdish allies in Syria, and Europe was not able to fill the gap, although the refugees from that conflict are more likely to end up in Europe than in America. In fact Europe is dependent on Turkey and North Africa to curb mass migration to the southern shores of the EU.
The EU has not developed a migration policy, which, if properly organised , could bring dynamism to our continent to compensate for the loss of dynamism that will inevitably flow from the ageing of the native European population.
The US is undermining the rules based international order in the field of trade. It is refusing to allow the appointment of replacement judges to the WTO’s appellate court, which will soon lead to that court ceasing to function. This is happening just at the time that our nearest neighbour may find itself relying on the WTO once its post Brexit transition period expires. 
THE RISE OF CHINA
China is returning to the dominant position it held in the world economy in the two millennia up to 1800.
It is doing this on the strength of its human capital, not its physical capital. It is educating more engineers that the US and the EU combined.
It is doing it through its competitive and  innovative firms, not through its monopolistic state enterprises. Chinese R and D spending will exceed US Rand D this year and far exceeds EU R and D. It is ahead of everyone in 5G communications, at the time the world economy is becoming ever more digital.
Chinese firms own Volvo, Pirelli and recently bought the firms supplying robots to the German car industry. EU could not buy the equivalent Chinese firms.Chinese military spending exceeds that of all EU states combined and is already half that of the US.
If the US thinks it can use trade policy to arrest Chinese development, it is probably making a mistake. 
But the US is right to insist on fair competition. China must be treated in the WTO as a developed country, and not get concessions intended for much poorer countries. In its response to the Chinese challenge, the EU should maintain its robust competition policy and should not try to pick industrial winners from Brussels.
THE RESPONSE OF EUROPE
Europe would be much better placed to defend its own interests, and to act as a balancing power in the world, if the euro functioned as a global reserve currency. To achieve that, we need to create a Capital Markets Union and complete the Banking Union. This requires a harmonisation of company insolvency rules throughout the EU or the eurozone.
The Eurozone must have a capacity to cope with localized shocks and to prevent contagion.  We need viable proposals for a eurozone wide reinsurance of bank deposits, and eurozone wide reinsurance of the unemployment  benefit systems of member states..
BREXIT IS A SETBACK FOR EUROPE……..STAGNATION MUST BE AVOIDED
There is no doubt but Brexit has been a setback for Europe. True, the EU had maintained its unity and stability, in stark contrast to the way in which the UK system has been convulsed by the divorce. But that does not take away from the fact that we are losing a relatively young, diverse and creative member state. 
The EU’s strategic weight in the world will be reduced by the absence of the UK.
The population of the remaining members of the  EU are, in global terms, relatively elderly, pessimistic and risk averse. This could lead the EU to make big mistakes.
I give some examples of this.
Many member states refuse even to contemplate the amendment of the EU Treaties because of the risk of defeats in referenda. If that remains the attitude, the EU will simply stagnate. Every successful human organisation must have the capacity to change its rules if this is demonstrably necessary. The US is unable to amend its constitution and we can see the problems that has led to.
Unlike the US, the EU has been able to attract and accommodate new member states over the last 50 years. At last week’s Summit, France the Netherlands and Denmark blocked the opening of accession talks with North Macedonia even though that country has done everything the EU asked to qualify, even changing its name, which was a highly sensitive matter. 
The fact that this rejectionism was led by President Macron, who makes great speeches about European integration, is particularly disquieting. I hope he changes his mind. Yes, we need tougher means of ensuring that the rule of law in respected in the most rigorous way but that could have been dealt with in the negotiations with North Macedonia, which would have gone on for years any way.
 THE SINGLE MARKET
We must defend the integrity of the EU Single Market, at the borders of the European Union and throughout its territory. 
Ireland must be seen to be, fully compliant with EU Single Market rules. Otherwise Ireland’s geographic position will be used against it by competitors for the investment.
The EU Single Market is not complete. There is much more to do.
An April 2019 Study “Mapping the Cost of non Europe” estimated that 
    + completing the  classic single market would add  713 billion euros to the EU economy. 
    + completing Economic and Monetary Union would add a further 322 billion, and    
    + completing a digital single market a further  178 billion euros. 
A more integrated energy market would save a further 231 billion and a more integrated EU approach to fighting organised crime would be worth 82 billion.
Cross border VAT fraud is costing 40 billion. This will be an area of special concern in regard to traffic between Britain and Northern Ireland.
These are some of the reasons why we must complete the Single Market.
Services account for three quarters of EU GDP. 
But  we have been very slow in creating a single EU market for services. 
In the field of Services, only one legislative proposal had been adopted during the term of the outgoing Commission, a proportionality test for new regulations on professions.
All other proposals are blocked.
I think that a major obstacle is vested interests in national or regional governments, who do not want to give up power.
By completing the Single Market, the EU can show that it has much more to offer to the world than a post Brexit Britain.
To help complete the Single Market, Ireland should be open to qualified majority voting on energy and climate matters.
We should also be open to carefully defined individual amendments to the EU Treaties if they can be shown to the public to deliver real benefits.
A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD
The existing Withdrawal Agreement protects UK environmental, product and labour standards, in a way that a mere Trade Agreement will never do. In any trade negotiation with a post Brexit Britain, maintaining a level competitive playing field will be vital.
No subsidies, no cartels, and no undercutting of EU standards must be insisted upon.
Likewise the UK must not be allowed to undercut the EU on worker protection, environmental and product quality standards. The UK will have to set up bureaucracies to devise and enforce UK standards. 200 EU environmental laws will have to be replaced by the UK. Westminster will be busy.
EU WIDE DEMOCRACY
It is over 40 years since the first European Parliament election.
While the  EP elections are hotly contested, the contests are often really about national issues.
A genuine EU wide debate does not take place, because the elections are confined within in national constituencies. An EU “polis” or public opinion has not yet been created.
My own view is that the President of the Commission should be elected separately from the Parliament, using a system of proportional representation (PR). We must have strong national democracy if we are to have a strong EU, and we must have strong national democracy if we are to have strong states.
There are remarkable differences in the level of confidence people in Europe feel in their own national democracy. According to a recent Pew Poll, 72% of Swedes have confidence in how their national democracy works. Within the Netherlands confidence in their system was  68%, in Poland it was 61% and in Germany 65%. 
But , at the other end of the spectrum, only  31% of British, and 32% of Spaniards and Italians had confidence in their own democratic systems.To build confidence in the EU, we also need to rebuild confidence in democracy itself, at every level of governance.
With Compliments of John Bruton

The European Commission and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) will host the first EU-U.S. high-level forum on small modular reactors (SMR).

This technology has potential for deployment worldwide in those countries that choose to use nuclear energy. The high-level forum will look into this issue by bringing together business stakeholders and government authorities.
The event will be held at the presence of EU Commissioner for Climate Action and Energy Miguel Arias Cañete and US Secretary of Energy Rick Perry.
Compliments of the European Commission

Today, the European Council appointed Christine Lagarde to be the President of the European Central Bank for a non-renewable term of 8 years.
Christine Lagarde will replace the outgoing President, Mario Draghi, as of 1 November 2019.
On 2 July 2019, the European Council considered Christine Lagarde to be the appropriate candidate for President of the European Central Bank. The Council (Economic and Financial Affairs) then issued a formal recommendation on 9 July 2019. The European Parliament and the European Central Bank delivered their opinions to the European Council, respectively on 17 September 2019 and on 25 July 2019.
Background
Article 283(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union specifies that appointments to the ECB executive board are made “by the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, from among persons of recognised standing and professional experience in monetary or banking matters, on a recommendation from the Council, after it has consulted the European Parliament and the Governing Council of the European Central Bank.”
The ECB executive board is responsible for the implementation of euro area monetary policy, as laid down by the ECB governing council. It is composed of the President, the Vice President and four other members, all appointed for a non-renewable 8-year term. The governing council is composed of six executive board members and the governors of national central banks of the euro area member states.
Compliments of the European Commission

Following the move by the U.S. today to apply countermeasures against imports from the EU in consequence of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Airbus dispute, Commissioner for Trade Cecilia Malmström made the following statement:
“We regret the choice of the U.S. to move ahead with tariffs. This step leaves us no alternative but to follow through in due course with our own tariffs in the Boeing case, where the U.S. has been found in breach of WTO rules.
Imposing tariffs on each other serves nobody’s long term interest. It will inflict very significant damage to the highly integrated supply chain of the aircraft sectors in the U.S. and the EU and will result in collateral damage to many other sectors already suffering under the current trade tensions.
The EU and U.S. have both been found in breach of WTO rules. As the world’s largest aircraft manufacturers, the EU and the U.S. have a joint responsibility to sit down and negotiate a settlement that is balanced and compliant with the WTO.
The EU has, this July, shared concrete proposals with the U.S. on clearly identified existing aircraft subsidies and on future support to our respective aircraft sectors. This offer remains on the table.
The Commission will monitor the impact of the announced U.S. countermeasures on the European products concerned, notably in the agricultural sector.
The European Commission is committed to defending European companies, farmers and consumers.”
Compliments of the European Commission

The European Commission has today recommended the European Council (Article 50) to endorse the agreement reached at negotiator level on the Withdrawal Agreement, including a revised Protocol on Ireland / Northern Ireland, and approve a revised Political Declaration on the framework of the future EU-UK relationship. The Commission also recommends that the European Parliament give its consent to this agreement. This follows a series of intensive negotiations between the European Commission and UK negotiators over the past few days.
Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, said: “This agreement is a fair compromise between the EU and the UK. It is testament to the commitment and willingness of both sides to do what is best for EU and UK citizens. We now have a newly agreed Protocol that protects peace and stability on the island of Ireland and fully protects our Single Market. I hope that we can now bring this over the line and provide the certainty our citizens and businesses so deserve.”
Michel Barnier, the European Commission’s Chief Negotiator, said: “We had difficult discussions over the past days. We have managed to find solutions that fully respect the integrity of the Single Market. We created a new and legally operative solution to avoid a hard border, and protect peace and stability on the island of Ireland. It is a solution that works for the EU, for the UK and for people and businesses in Northern Ireland.”
The revised Protocol provides a legally operational solution that avoids a hard border on the island of Ireland, protects the all-island economy and the Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement in all its dimensions and safeguards the integrity of the Single Market. This solution responds to the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland with the aim of protecting peace and stability.
All other elements of the Withdrawal Agreement remain unchanged in substance, as per the agreement reached on 14 November 2018. The Withdrawal Agreement brings legal certainty where the UK’s withdrawal from the EU created uncertainty: citizens’ rights, the financial settlement, a transition period at least until the end of 2020, governance, Protocols on Gibraltar and Cyprus, as well as a range of other separation issues.
The revised Political Declaration
In terms of regulations, Northern Ireland will remain aligned to a limited set of rules related to the EU’s Single Market in order to avoid a hard border: legislation on goods, sanitary rules for veterinary controls (“SPS rules”), rules on agricultural production/marketing, VAT and excise in respect of goods, and state aid rules.
In terms of customs, the EU-UK Single Customs Territory, as agreed in November 2018, has been removed from the Protocol on Ireland / Northern Ireland, at the request of the current UK government. EU and UK negotiators have now found a new way to achieve the goal of avoiding a customs border on the island of Ireland, while at the same time ensuring Northern Ireland remains part of the UK’s customs territory. This agreement fully protects the integrity of the EU’s Single Market and Customs Union, and avoids any regulatory and customs checks at the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.
Finally, the EU and the UK have agreed to create a new mechanism on ‘consent’, which will give the Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly a decisive voice on the long-term application of relevant EU law in Northern Ireland. The Commission has been in close contact with the Irish government on this point.
The revised Political Declaration
The main change in the Political Declarationrelates to the future EU-UK economic relationship where the current UK government has opted for a model based on a Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The Political Declaration provides for an ambitious FTA with zero tariffs and quotas between the EU and the UK. It states that robust commitments on a level playing field should ensure open and fair competition. The precise nature of commitments will be commensurate with the ambition of the future relationship and take into account the economic connectedness and geographic proximity of the UK.
Next steps
It is for the European Council (Article 50) to endorse the revised Withdrawal Agreement in its entirety, as well as approve the revised Political Declaration on the framework of the future relationship.
Before the Withdrawal Agreement can enter into force, it needs to be ratified by the EU and the UK. For the EU, the Council of the European Union must authorise the signature of the Withdrawal Agreement, before sending it to the European Parliament for its consent. The United Kingdom must ratify the agreement according to its own constitutional arrangements.
For more information
Letter from President Jean-Claude Juncker to President Donald Tusk
Revised Protocol on Ireland / Northern Ireland
Revised Political Declaration
European Commission Recommendation
Questions & Answers
Compliments of the European Commission

“Check against delivery”

Mesdames et Messieurs,
Aujourd’hui, nous avons trouvé un accord avec le gouvernement britannique sur le retrait ordonné du Royaume-Uni et le cadre de notre future relation.
C’est le résultat d’un travail intensif des deux équipes de négociateurs, l’équipe britannique et notre propre équipe, que je veux personnellement remercier pour leur ténacité et leur professionnalisme, mais aussi, du côté européen, d’un dialogue permanent avec les 27 Etats membres et le Parlement européen, avec qui nous avons réellement co-construit ce nouvel accord.
Cet accord est agréé au niveau des négociateurs. Avec le Président Juncker, qui a conclu ce matin avec le Premier ministre Johnson, nous le présenterons tout à l’heure au Conseil européen à 27. Je veux d’ailleurs remercier le Président Tusk pour sa confiance tout au long de ces trois années.
Ce texte, Mesdames et Messieurs, permet d’apporter de la sécurité juridique et de la certitude là où le Brexit crée de l’incertitude, en particulier et d’abord pour :
      Les citoyens européens au Royaume-Uni et les Britanniques dans un Etat membre de l’Union. Ils ont toujours été, et ils resteront, notre priorité, celle des Etats membres et du Parlement européen. L’incertitude pour ces citoyens a trop duré. Grâce à cet accord, leurs droits seront enfin garantis dans la durée.
      Les porteurs de projets financés par le budget de l’Union européenne, dans les 27 Etats membres et au Royaume-Uni puisque, grâce à cet accord, les engagements financiers déjà pris à 28 seront honorés à 28.
      Toutes les personnes et entreprises concernées par tous les autres sujets de la séparation, comme Euratom, la protection des droits de propriété intellectuelle existants, la protection des indications géographiques ou la protection des données personnelles.
      Cette proposition comprend aussi la période de transition, qui avait été demandée par le gouvernement britannique et qui durera jusqu’à la fin 2020 – 14 mois – et peut-être une ou deux années de plus en cas d’accord conjoint du Royaume-Uni et de l’Union européenne.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The UK government has wanted to open one point in the Withdrawal Agreement: the question of the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland.
Throughout these negotiations, the EU and the UK were fully committed to protect peace and stability on the island of Ireland.
We had to reconcile two objectives:
First, include a legally operative solution in the Withdrawal Agreement that would:
      Avoid a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland;
      Preserve the all-island economy;
      Protect the integrity of the Single Market.
Secondly, a point extremely important to Prime Minister Johnson and the UK was that Northern Ireland remains in the UK’s customs territory.
Discussions over the past days have at times been difficult.
But we have delivered. Together.
The solution that we found rests on four main elements
1/ First, Northern Ireland will remain aligned to a limited set of EU rules, notably related to goods.
      This means that all applicable procedures on goods will take place at the points of entry into Northern Ireland and not across the island.
      For this purpose, UK authorities will be in charge of applying the Union’s Customs Code in Northern Ireland.
2/ Secondly, beyond applicable procedures, there is also the question of customs duties.
      Northern Ireland will remain in the UK’s customs territory. It will therefore benefit from the UK’s future trade policy.
      But Northern Ireland will also remain an entry point into our Single Market.
So what have we done to square this circle?
      UK authorities can apply UK tariffs on products coming from third countries, so long as those goods entering Northern Ireland are not at risk of entering our Single Market.
      However, for goods at risk of entering the Single Market, UK authorities will apply the EU’s tariffs.
3/ Third, this night and this morning still, we were working on the issue of VAT.
It is an important subject to avoid distortion of competition within the Single Market for goods.
On this point also, we have managed to achieve two objectives:
      Maintain the integrity of the Single Market
      But also satisfy the UK’s legitimate wishes.
4/ Finally, Prime Minister Johnson and the Taoiseach wanted to ensure long-term democratic support for the application by UK authorities of relevant Union rules in Northern Ireland.
      Four years after the entry into force of the Protocol, the elected representatives of Northern Ireland will be able to decide, by simple majority, whether to continue applying relevant Union rules in Northern Ireland or not.
This democratic support is a cornerstone of our newly agreed approach.
Why?
Because this newly agreed Protocol is no longer to be replaced by a subsequent agreement between the EU and the UK.  So it makes sense to ensure consent.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Obviously, when discussing Northern Ireland, we talk about the economy, about technical matters, about goods. But for me, since 3 years, what really matters are the people of Northern Ireland and Ireland.
What really matters is peace.
Mesdames et Messieurs,
Enfin, au-delà de cette séparation et de l’accord de retrait, nous avons trouvé un accord pour réviser la déclaration politique, qui devra être adoptée par le Conseil européen et qui sera le cadre pour rebâtir un partenariat ambitieux avec le Royaume-Uni, pays ami, pays partenaire et pays allié.
Sur ce point, le gouvernement de Boris Johnson a fait le choix clair d’un accord de libre-échange.
Toute référence à d’autres options, notamment l’option de créer entre nous un territoire douanier unique a donc été éliminée.
Ce qui ne change pas, en revanche, est notre proximité géographique et notre interdépendance avec l’économie du Royaume-Uni, et nous nous sommes mis d’accord pour avoir des garanties solides de level playing field afin de permettre un accord de libre-échange ambitieux sans tarifs ni quotas.
Sur ce point, je peux témoigner, pour en avoir souvent parlé avec eux, que les Etats membres, le Parlement européen et les entreprises du marché unique sont extrêmement attentifs à l’existence d’un socle commun sur les standards applicables à la fin de la transition, en matière de droits sociaux, de protection de l’environnement, d’aides d’Etat et les questions de fiscalité.
Au total, le niveau d’ambition de notre futur accord de libre-échange sera proportionnel au niveau et à la qualité des règles du jeu économique entre nous.
Mesdames et Messieurs,
Voilà l’accord que nous avons conclu au terme de ces journées intenses de négociation. Le texte juridique en est maintenant disponible.
Sur cette base, l’évaluation que nous présenterons tout à l’heure avec le Président Juncker au Conseil européen est que nous avons obtenu ensemble un résultat juste et raisonnable, qui correspond à nos principes.
Du côté européen, Il appartient maintenant au Conseil européen d’apprécier le contenu de cet accord. Et ensuite au Conseil de l’approuver, tout comme le Parlement européen, que je veux remercier pour sa confiance et qui aura le dernier mot.
Nous allons poursuivre ce processus dès aujourd’hui, dans le dialogue et le respect de nos institutions.
Nous avons aujourd’hui une base juste et raisonnable – fair and reasonable – pour un retrait ordonné du Royaume-Uni et surtout pour commencer – nous le souhaitons le plus tôt possible, dès le 1er novembre – à travailler à un nouveau partenariat avec le Royaume-Uni.
Compliments of the European Commission

“Check against delivery”

Good to see you and good to see the Prime Minister, my friend Boris Johnson.
We have a deal. And this deal means that there is no need for any kind of prolongation.
This is a fair and balanced agreement. It is testament to our commitment to finding solutions.
It provides certainty where Brexit creates uncertainty. It protects the rights of our citizens and it protects peace and stability on the island of Ireland. There will be no border on the island of Ireland. And the Single Market will be protected.
This deal is not about us, the deal is about people and peace.
And I look forward to continue my conversations with Boris, because we will start the negotiations on the future relations immediately after the deal will have been approved.
We will start our debates on 1 November, without delay.
Tonight, together with Michel Barnier, I will explain the deal to the 27 Heads of State or Government.
And of course, it is for both our Parliaments to have the final say. It is not only Westminster having to approve the deal – the deal being in fact a Treaty – it is also up to the European Parliament to do the same.
So thank you, Boris for – I have to say – the excellent relations we had throughout the last weeks.
I have to say: I am happy about the deal, but I am sad about Brexit.
Compliments of the European Commission