Mr. Günther Oettinger:

I have a few remarks to make. A figure of €200 million per day makes up the entire investment of the UK. However, in light of what it is getting back, the figure is far less in the end at between €12 billion, €13 billion or €14 billion per year net. There is an ongoing figure of €1.1 billion or €1.2 billion. We are working with €1.1 billion because some things are not clear. Should we integrate the European development aid fund into the budget or should it stay outside? Which amount of money must we foresee for new programmes against asymmetric shocks for a reform delivery tool deepening and completing our European monetary union?

With regard to digital taxation, there is a clear demand from seven or eight member states to prepare a legislative proposal. In parallel is the ongoing work by the OECD. We are waiting to see what its conviction is. In general, OTT digital platforms use a lot of data. Billions of data come from European citizens using their services but nearly none of their revenue comes to Europe. If we look at Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Qualcomm, Microsoft and all the others, we can see that to have a bigger share of the value chain should be in our common interest. There is no decision for the moment. We are checking the situation and will then come to the Council and member states when there is a realistic option.

What can we do if there is a hard Brexit? The Commission and Mr. Barnier are really near to the Irish Government and Chambers Ireland and are looking at the risks facing the EU 27 and Ireland, in particular. Ireland's ports were mentioned. If we need more capacity to transport products from Ireland to the EU 27 and from Amsterdam, Rotterdam or Antwerp to one of Ireland's ports, we can invest in respect of connecting to Europe. We have more flexibility via our reform of the financial regulation. We can take money from this programme to co-finance a project that is important for Ireland if there is a super-hard Brexit.

I agree with the point about Erasmus+. Erasmus+ is one of the few programmes I do not want to see reduced. I want to invest more. It is up to the UK. Erasmus+ and Horizon are open to third countries. Switzerland is taking part. It is up to London to decide whether it is in the interest of Oxford, Cambridge or London to be a part of Horizon and whether Erasmus+, an open programme, should be for English and Scottish young people. It then must pay something so that the younger generation can take part. We would prefer such a European approach - a continental approach - in the interest of our younger generation and the younger generation in the UK.

I agree with the point made about youth unemployment. We can see how different Europe is.

There are some regions that are very successful with no or almost no youth unemployment. An example would be the Baltic states, Sweden, Denmark or Germany. We are investing more than ever via a European budget to combat youth unemployment. My problem is that the absorption rate is not high enough. Countries cannot use the amount of money we are offering them because the administrations are unable to use it, finance projects and reform and redirect their labour markets. We are not a centralised European Union. We are a union of member states and we need competent and efficient national and regional administrations. The absorption rate is really not convincing. I could give the committee some more background information. Look at Spain. It is really incredible. There is a lot of money in Brussels and it cannot use it. It is the same with the southern part of Italy.