Dr. Robert Sweeney:

Yes. I do not understand the legalities of what the new proposal will be but it is certainly the case that a state will listen to what the Commission has to say, and might well implement. States will certainly listen to it and even if it is not binding, that does not mean that a member state will not follow the advice.

The third question was on the vagueness around the adjustment path. Certain countries can extend the adjustment path from four years to seven years if they agree to undertake certain reforms. The question was whether this raises questions of democratic sovereignty. Absolutely. It is not just this increase from four to seven years. I think that having a 60% debt-to-GDP ratio and a 3% deficit rule are huge encroachments on sovereignty in the first place. The closed-shop negotiation of potential extension from four to seven years is just another layer to that. One thing I would highlight in that regard is the tit-for-tat that will go on in order to get that extension. Some of it will be climate investment, and the fact that governments can extend the adjustment period if they undertake investments that will ultimately reduce their emissions is very welcome. However, it will not be the only type of incentive. Reforms have to be, for instance, what is called growth-enhancing, must ensure financial stability and so on. That is open to interpretation but I guess that might mean commitments on, say, changing retirement ages and things like that. I would guess that would be one of the incentives the Commission will give in order to extend the period. That would raise democratic and sovereignty-related issues.