In this video we are going to study one of the concepts that is behind most of the sequential digital circuits out there, and that is the concept of finite state machines. Now in order to think about this concept, let's imagine an example. Let's think of a traffic light. Traffic light is initially at a stage in which the light is red. After a certain amount of time, this light makes a transition into a different state in which the color is green. You know this light is going to remain green for a while and then eventually we'll make another transition to another state in which it is yellow and eventually as well make another transition to red. So this is the typical sequence of steps we find in a traffic light. Now if we think a little bit more in detail, what makes a transition between these two states? Well typically it's a timer. It's some sort of signal that says that certain amount of time has gone by. With this signal we can think of it, this timer is actually an input to this machine. So this diagram can be rewritten in such a way that the transition from red to green only happens, let's call this input t, this transition only happens when t is equal to 1. In other words when the timer notifies us that certain amount of time has gone by. However, if the traffic light is at its red state and this timer has not reached its value, we can represent that transition saying that for t equals 0. In other words, while the timer returns a value 0, the light remains at the state red and the same type of transitions can be done in the remaining states. When the light is green and the timer hasn't turned into 1, the light remains at green. But when the timer becomes 1 again, the light makes a transition between green or from green to yellow. And similarly we have the same situation here for t equals 0 and the transition from t equals 1. Well this diagram we have here is what we call a finite state machine. It is a machine that makes transition from state to state based on basically two conditions, the state in which we are currently and the value of certain inputs. Now in terms of Boolean logic, we can represent this transition as a truth table. We can write what are the conditions such that for any given value of t and the current state, we calculate the next state of the machine. In this case, we have six combinations, t is 0 and we are at a red state, t is 1 and we are at a red state, t is 0 and we are in green, 1 and we are in green and 0 and we are in yellow and 1 and we are in yellow. So these are the six possible combinations we have between the states which are red, green and yellow and the possibility of two values in the input. Now the next state, we can write it for each of the combinations. If t is equal to 0 and I am at a red state, this corresponds precisely to this transition which means that the next state, the light is going to remain red. However, when I am in the red state and the time is equal to 1, the transition is done to the green state. And similarly we can write the following transitions. If t is equal to 0 and we are in the green state, we remain in the green state and if it's 1, we make a transition to the yellow state. If we are in the yellow state, the t is equal to 0, we remain in the yellow state and whenever t is equal to 1 and we are in the yellow state, we make a transition to the red state. Okay, now suppose that I actually want to make sure that this machine controls a real traffic light. But this traffic light is a circuit that has two beats such that beat 0 and beat 1 encode the light that is going to be on. And the encoding that I have is that whenever I want the light to be red, there should be a 00 in this input. Whenever I want the green line to be on, it should be 01 and whenever I want the yellow light to be on, these two beats should have a 1-0 value. So immediately we can see how to this truth table, which represents a transition between states, I can now add the value of an output that is going to encode the proper beats such that this traffic light is controlled. In this case, red is 00, green is 01, 01, 1-0, 1-0 and 0-0 again. Now as we can see now, if we apply the same encoding for here, and we put a 00, 00, 01, 01, 1-0 and 1-0, what we have here is basically a truth table. And it's a truth table that at the same time is telling us how to make a transition from one state to the next. And this is the definition of a finite state machine. Now let's consider a second example. Let's suppose that my system is a little bit different. I have a sensor that is telling me if the traffic has stopped or the traffic is going. So I have these two states here, stop and go. I do have the same input as before. I have a timer that tells me, let's call it T, that tells me if I make a transition from this state to this state. And I can also remain here or remain here. But now let's think about this difference. Suppose I have another input that tells me if trucks are waiting. In other words, if the trucks are stopped here, then this signal, let's call it TR for trucks, this signal will be 1. Same thing happens when the traffic is circulating, but I still sense trucks going by, this signal will still be 1. Now what happens here is the following. I would like to produce an output from this machine that warns me when there is the possibility of pollution. Now the possibility of pollution occurs when I am in the stop state and the trucks are waiting. In other words, when we have all traffic that has stopped and the truck sensor detects trucks that have been stopped here, then the output of my machine should be 1. However, when the traffic is circulating, when there is no traffic stop, then I should ignore this trucks waiting signal and the pollution should be 0. Now let's work out the details here. The easy ones to make the transition are from this state to this state and from this state to this state. So if I am at the stop state, so these are the two inputs. If I am at the stop state and the timer tells me that it's time to make a transition, I don't care what is the value of trucks waiting, I'll just make another transition. Same thing happens here. If the timer is 1, I don't care what is the value of the other input, I make this transition here. Something similar occurs here. If traffic is flowing and my timer tells me it's not time yet, I don't care what is the value of the other signal, this is what I'm representing by an X, and I make exactly this transition. Now let's think carefully about this transition over here. Two things can happen producing this transition, which is the value 0, 0, and the value 0, 1. Now we agree that the time hasn't come yet to make a transition, therefore the traffic is waiting, but now looking at this second signal over here, which corresponds to the truck waiting, I have two possible situations. The one above is telling me that the time has not arrived yet, but I don't have any trucks waiting, therefore the pollution should be 0. However, in this situation the pollution signal should be 1. The way we are going to represent this functionality here is by attaching to each one of these inputs, or each one of these transitions, we are going to attach the value of the output. Now when is pollution detected? Definitely not when the traffic is going, not when I make this transition, not when I open the lights so that traffic can circulate, but precisely on this condition. When the traffic cannot circulate yet, I detect trucks waiting, pollution is 1. In this case over here, even though we remain on the same state, in this case the pollution signal is 0, because even though the time hasn't arrived yet to make a transition and let the cars go, I'm not detecting any trucks, therefore the pollution is equal to 0. If you look at it carefully, there is a very significant difference between these two machines, because now the output that I'm interested in, it is not attached to the state as it was here, because the state was controlling the traffic light, but here the output depends not only on the state, but also on the value of the input. Now, analogously to how we did it here, we can write a truth table in which we write all possible eight cases, which is what is the value of T, what is the value of trucks, and what is the value of a state, and then we write eight cases, 0, 0 stop, 0, 0 go, 0, 1 stop, 0, 1 go, 1, 0 stop, 1, 0 go, 1, 1 stop, and 1, 1 go, and what we can do is calculate the next state. Let's write the state plus, and we see that from a 0, 0, if you are in the stop, we make a transition to the same stop, 0, 0 go, we remain in go, 0, 1 stop, this is a very important one, 0, 1 stop corresponds to this transition, which means we're still in the state stop, 0, 1 go means that we are in this state, and we have the value 0, 1, so we remain in go, 1, 0 stop, this is the case in which we have one transition, 1, time has come up, 0, and therefore make a transition to go, 1, 0 go is this condition over here, we make a transition to stop, 1, 1 stop is a transition to go, and 1, 1 go is a transition to stop, so with this column over here we have captured the transition of this system, but as you can see what we haven't captured yet is the behavior of this pollution signal that I'm interested in, and in order to do that I need to write an extra column here in which, depending on the value of the states and the inputs, then I have to write my output, and in this case it's very easy because the pollution signal is 1 here, as we said before, and 0 in the rest. If we apply an encoding and we say that a stop is encoded as 0, and go is encoded at 1, and we apply this translation to this table, we end up again with a truth table. Now again, what is the difference between these two finite state machines? The mechanism is more or less the same except the tiny difference is that in here the outputs that are controlling certain system out there are directly derived from the states, remember, red, green, and yellow was the only thing we needed, whereas in here the output not only depends on the state, but also depends on the input. These two type of machines have different names, this type over here is what is called as a Moore finite state machine, and the type down here is called Mealy finite state machine. And as you can see, for some cases a Moore machine offers you a much better implementation or a much more intuitive implementation of a system whereas a Mealy machine offers you a more intuitive implementation for some other scenarios. In both cases the truth table over here can be translated into a set of flip-flops and gates that end up implementing the finite state machine.


Hello everybody, it's nice to be back on YouTube again. It's been a while I am now broadcasting from a top-secret location on the other side of the world So let's get started today. I want to offer some criticism and a little praise of this book water for sale now It's it was written six years ago now or seven years to be to be exact But it's it's well written and well researched a lot of great data it's a nice easy short read as you can see and And it's a really specific topic an interesting topic So let's get started. He starts by saying something that we've all probably heard Water is a basic human right not a commodity to be bought sold and Traded and then he proceeds to just annihilate this argument. Just blow it out of the water It's fantastic. One one thing you never hear from these anti-water privatization Socialists is how much water is there in the world? Don't you think that's an interesting question? It was interesting to me. He's done the research Not including salt water and frozen water just looking at the fresh water There is is a two million three hundred thousand liters per capita on planet earth Rainfall alone Subtracting the evaporation that happens as the raindrops are falling through the air The the the water that lands on the ground from rain averages 1,000 liters per day per person. I think that's pretty amazing There is clearly no shortage of water in the world. What there is is a substantial excess of government so The author Frederick Segerfels he's done great work here Like I said well written well researched We we are different flavors of libertarian and I think those differences become become quite apparent He's he's from Kato or was with Kato when he wrote this book and there there are impurices there Unlike the the Mises Institute folks Who are who are rationalists? I think economics is and must be a rational science There's no time for that discussion now But I think the empiricism is useful that helps people imagine what a free society might look like and how a free society might work and Being able to imagine it for most people might be even more important than making the rational case So he offers a ton of examples. I'll read just one or parts of one At the beginning of the 1980s the Chilean government granted farmers companies and local authorities The right to own local water This enabled them to sell it in a free market and affected them the effects have been outstanding Water supply has grown faster than in any other country 30 years ago only 27 percent of rural Chileans and 63 percent in urban communities 27 and 63 percent had steady access to safe water today's figures are 94 and 99% Respectively the highest for all the world's medium income nations Then oh it he goes on he talks about how just the fact that water is Sensitive to market prices causes people to economize water, you know suddenly drip irrigation will replace Spray irrigation when government stops controlling the price He talks about Chilean agriculture. It has moved from low value activities such as cattle farming and cultivation of cereals and Ali aginas, I don't know what that means Plants to fruit and wine production, which is much more lucrative between 1975 and 1990 without any Major infrastructure investment being made Chile raised his agricultural productivity 6% annually in and today is the world's largest exporter of winter fruit in the to the northern hemisphere pretty awesome Chapter 6 might be the most important chapter and There he talks about the effects of supposedly free water that all these anti privatization Socialist control freaks are promoting their free water Has caused all kinds of water-borne diseases among poor people who to whom it is illegal for entrepreneurs to deliver water They talk about the he talks but writes about the distance that poor people have to travel to get to sources of safe water he talks about just the Them waiting in lines and there you see you feel the importance of the argument for a free society and for commerce He talks also about absurdities Urban dwellers pay nearly a thousand times as much for their water as farmers do subsidies and So rice is grown in the desert a water guzzling enterprise at the same time that California cities are spending huge sums of money on this desalination plants That's the price of free water Of course the socialists will say what they always say we just need to manage it better We need a better leader. We need a stronger leader. We need more laws better laws strictly enforced laws What that means implicitly is more police more prisons more batons more tasers more handcuffs It's the road to serve them He also notes that in many places the poor people pay Pay 12 times as much for water as like the As the government price because you know, there's no one brings water to them So that he writes about that black market. Oh, and this is a really interesting detail Of course the black market comes to the rescue in India in India for example several states have quite advanced and informal water markets the profit from this trade Have been estimated at one point three eight Billion annually the problem though is that the trade is illegal There's your your free water socialists here. We we deviate as libertarians He he talks about how great it would be if there was a free market for water But then he makes these absurd statements as far as I'm concerned But it is worth repeating That public authorities are still at liberty to control the price of water supplied privately hmm He departs from from the the strict free market view even further Even further with statements like just a second Water distribution is a natural monopoly and Private monopolies unlike public ones cannot be influenced through general elections Lord help us if we're relying on general elections that Yeah, I'm not I'm not even gonna address that. It's just too painful But he contradicts himself, you know, he says He later he says people would simply go elsewhere for their water as is common Especially among the billion or more people who at present do not have access to pipe water so much for the natural monopoly And towards the end of the book he he departs from a discussion of capitalism and Discusses corporatism in its place that is tragically Common with inside the Beltway libertarianism, although they do do great work So he comes to two very unsurprising conclusions number one the private businessmen are better than government bureaucrats at delivering water to people and number two when governments contract with Companies to do water. There's going to be a lot of corruption You don't need any empirical evidence for that although he's an empiricist, so he went at it that way You know, you I could tell you that rationally Make that case last thing Back when I was just still looking for my ideological footing seems like a lifetime ago I came across a documentary called the corporation and They very they upheld this idea of Bolivia's uprising spontaneous Bolshevik uprising against water privatization. So he sheds a lot of light on that You have to read it yourself it starts on page 84 But that you encounter that these anti-water privatization people they cite Bolivia quite frequently But it's not all that simple The the rise in water the rise in price was not that big As as they claim The government of course was corrupt and it required This private company that wanted to deliver water to also build a freaking dam and to hire You know the politically connected contractor to build this dam and just to you know That was the government scheme of funneling money from this privatization So that had a lot to do with increasing the price. Don't you think? And he also writes about how there were some interests behind those supposedly spontaneous protests So so that's that hope you enjoyed my book review. I do recommend it Water for sale by Frederick Segerfeld. Thanks for listening


Yeah, we on boss talk one-on-one. I said, man, I got to do something. Hit them streets, man. Say hit them streets, man. I got to do something, right? So I said, man, what am I going to do? I said, man, I'm not selling no crack. Uh-uh, I can't do that. It's so weird. So, bam, I said, nah, I'm going to mess y'all up. And we ain't talk about this with Charleston, you know what I'm saying? You know, I used to always tell him that I was saying I'm so boss talk. Y'all getting exclusive. Y'all getting exclusive. I said, man, I know what I'm going to do. Charleston went to Houston, had this little boom. I said, nigga, I'm going to start pimping.  I said, man, I said, Charleston, I'm going to start pimping now. So I said, I'm like, so Charleston like, man, man, man, man, man, man, man, man. I said, shh. So, you know, I still remember. This is Super Bowl time. She went to Houston and called and said, hey, we ready? You know what I'm saying? We're going to come back.  Oh, she got a big bang. Oh, man. As Charleston, man, this boy talking about a look. I said, ooh, man, I said, oh, what's wrong? We driving back. Charleston almost had a heart attack when we were driving back. Yeah. Why?  Like a heart attack? Like a heart attack. We had to literally, we was laughing, but he was panicking.  So I had to, man, get in the car. We had to drive to the hospital. He had to go to the hospital. Wow. We in the middle of nowhere. He told me he was panicking. He was, he had like a panic attack. So we had to get him, they let him go. We get in the car. Why he panicking for?  Because all that money, your son is doomed, man. I don't know, man. No, no, no, that ain't it. Why he panicking for? Nigga just gon' do it, man. I said, man, so that was the transformation. We went back. Went all the way to the, I'm up now. We went forward. So how long did you pen for? We went to forward. I'm gonna mention I went, we went to forward, right? And I say, Charles, man, I gotta find the club to put in. He said, man, take it to these rooms over here. You know what I'm saying?  So, man, I did it. So I'm like, man, I ain't, we gon' do it. So I went over there, I did it, put it in there. You know what I'm saying? Next day. Now at this time, I'm in a relationship, right? Okay, we're the same chick. No, this is another chick. I'm in a relationship. Now, with her, I'm telling her, like, man, I got a weed house and forward. I gotta go drop the weed off at this time and pick the weed up at this time, the money stuff up at this time, right? She like, okay, that's a bit. So at the whole time, I'm gon' get her, take her to work. I gotta go pick her up and drop off. But I'm in a relationship, right? And in my mind, I still, man, man, I was charged with her. I still remember, I'm sitting there, right? We getting, man, we getting some money. I'm to my charge, man, I'm to my money. So I'm like, damn.   I'm doing, bro. You know what I'm saying? And it was just him and his cousin, don't tell you. And they say, man, you trippin'. Man, you trippin', man, that's a hoe, man. She's supposed to give you that money, man.    I said, come on, we gon' come and get me, bro. I'm telling you, man. Man, nigga, like, man, you trippin', bro. So, bam, kept goin' with it. But every time I came home, I kinda feel guilty. But at that time, the girl I was with, she was a purse girl. So whenever she be like- Start trippin', you gon' get her a purse. How about she go get her brand new purse? Oh, she get her brand new purse. Everything good. Yeah. So now we done moved to this big old house. Man, pimpin' good, man, pimpin' good. And she ain't askin' you where all this money comin' from to buy all this stuff? Yeah. I told her I had a house. I told her I had a couple of houses out there in Fort Worth. Yeah. She thought I was a tribe boy. She thought I was a dope boy. But I'm tellin' like, nah, even though, so we went up and gettin' that house. Oh, man, yeah. So now my mind said is, I got to leave this alone. Because at the end of the day, if it a crash on me, I know it, I mean, I got the feeling. Man, I still, my boy Charles and I said, man, I'm through, bro.  I ain't, I don't get that. I said, man, I'm finna go pick her up.  And you only had one girl. I had one. Wow, you makin' that money. But I had probably one of the baddest things out there in Fort Worth.  I was Charles and was here right in there. When you picked up, what did you do with? Man, she worked at Rich, right? She used to have a white guy. The white guy was a person that didn't even rich. So I never bought nothing for her. Never, I never bought nothing. He'd take a shopping. Her done, I never spent a dollar. Every dollar she made came to me. I didn't have to spend no money on her. Cause he spent all the money on her. And she gon', I'm talking every single day, he never let her leave that club with no less than $500. Okay. She's that bad. Oh man, I was charging with her. Man, I wish my boy were with her, bro.


very welcome indeed to be joining the building for this session on Ireland and the future of the European Union. It's a great pleasure to welcome you all and I'm particularly delighted to welcome our guests from the Institute of European and International Affairs in Dublin, to welcome Paul Cunningham from RTEs the Week of Politics and I'm delighted that we're going to be able to host a student-centered event where we had students talking about their Europe, the Europe of the present and the future. I'm delighted also to link up with the Minister's initiative launched yesterday on the Citizens Dialog. We'll be saying more about that as we go on but for now it's a pleasure to introduce the Director of the Institute for European International Affairs Barry Ackers Barry is just going to say a few words at the air centre. Thank you John. Good afternoon everybody, great to be here today. Thank you John and all the staff at Manus University for facilitating this meeting this afternoon and thank Paul Cunningham, not only of the Week of Politics but also of morning Ireland this morning so he nods off during the course of today's interview with Pleistia of Excusions. Let me first of all tell you what the IAA is. It is Ireland's leading think tank. We are focused on international affairs. We've been in existence for 30 years. We went from the Institute of European Affairs to the Institute of International and European Affairs but our main focus at the moment is on Brexit on the one hand and the future of the Europe 27. On the other hand, normally what we do is we have meetings where pod leaders and experts in academics and politicians, policy makers, they come in and they give a speech. Well we've changed that around today because we want to engage our citizens in this discussion and explain a little bit of why. So if the upheaval of the last few years has taught liberal elites like myself anything at all is that any policy initiative that is not firmly rooted in real and broad public dialogue is destined for failure. I am an enthusiast for the European project but I was in politics myself long enough to know that good policy gets much better through proper immersion in public dialogue. It is in this spirit that the European Union has now emerged days it has to be said from some of its most difficult times to turn not to its member states but to its citizens. The EU has come through a period when its very survival was far from guaranteed suitably chasing the contract now seems seeks to summon fresh energy through a consultative public dialogue. This is not to provide a separate or parallel legitimacy from that which derives from the treaties of the European Union and the institutions. It's not a comment on the existing democracies of the European Union rather it is to acknowledge the reality that if you don't plan the battle you will battle the plan and Europe wants to engage with its citizens in order to plan them. Whatever brings people to the debate whether it is intellectual curiosity or enlightened self-interest the more they take part the better. However known is under any illusion that the EU will be on the tip of everyone's tongue but not being able to do everything, not being able to involve everything should not be an excuse to do nothing. Politicians have been guilty of Europeanising failure and nationalising success. Yesterday Minister Comey pointed out yesterday that while people see the EU as too remote they also feel that it interferes too much in their lives. So it is in this spirit that the teacher launched the citizens dialogue that John mentioned yesterday. It is in this spirit that President Macron called for a democratic dialogue across the entire continent of Europe. And it is in this spirit that the IAEA has brought together this panel today because we want to hear the views of students, of young people, of our citizens throughout Ireland and develop a proper response to the challenges that have just outlined. The European Commission itself has also posed questions for citizens in a couple of initiatives that have emerged over the last year. The first is the white paper which is produced by President Juncker and they set out a few scenarios for how the European Union might develop. For example, I won't go through them all, do we just stay as we are, stand still, do no more, continue the way we have been for the last while. Or do we pair back to just a single mark, forget about all the other competences that the European Union has developed over the last few years. Or do we allow some countries to go faster and others to stay still, in other words a multi-speed Europe. That's the kind of scenarios that the European Union has now asked the citizens to think about. Not because of things one of the scenarios should stand out over any others, but just as a debating point to bring people into the dialogue. It has also issued a number of reflection papers on specific issues like globalization, the social dimension of the European Union and the EU's finances. And they are also a way for people to come into this debate. So that's the context. I'll stop at that. I want to now hand over to Paul and to your panel. Thanks for your attention. Thanks very much. I thought it would probably be a good idea to have a general conversation. So rather than getting into detail, I've tried to get what people's opinions are and they've been divided up into two parts. One is what is Europe to you. What does it mean? And then it's the second part of what could change. So if you actually get a sense of what people think of it, then we get some understanding of how the EU has projected itself up to now. And then as it moves forward, what could or couldn't change. But I think it's unfair to ask these six people to start talking about those things without saying something about myself. So just very shortly I wanted to bring... I brought two props with me. This is the first one. It's a very dramatic piece. And this is something I managed to knock out at the Berlin Wall in December of 1989. Because I wanted to be a journalist. I wanted to travel. Eastern Europe was falling apart. So I managed to farm some money. Bus, train, train, bus, hitched. I managed to get to Berlin in the beginning of December 31st. I was sitting on a wall with a guy from Leipzig and I spoke German a little bit. He spoke English a little bit. And between his hooch that he produced in his back garden and my cigarettes, we spoke and spoke and spoke about what was happening in front of us. And every now and again you'd stop, mid-conversation say, I just can't believe this. And for me, that was a sort of defining moment for my relationship with Europe. This idea of democracy, of freedom of expression, freedom of speech, of journalism, of collaboration. These were huge themes for me. And that sort of informed my view of European cooperation and that idea of putting sovereignty. The other thing, the other problem that brought us this. The reason I pointed that was four years later, in 1993, I was in, in 1993 and 1994, I was reporting from Bosnia. And I was in the B-hatch pocket in western Bosnia, which is a small pocket about the size of the county victim, surrounded in all sides. And there were army up in the hills and they were indiscriminately shooting down other people who were inside in the box. People with long sights, rifles, high power, and they were just waiting for someone to move. And that night, and it was a flight of the night, I went down and there was a disco on down, which they were having down in a car park in a bunker. So even though they were under siege, they still had a disco. And there was one girl who was talking to the translator and then she went down and she was dancing on the floor and she was giving it large. And I was talking to the translator and she said, the translator is really impressive, because there was sort of airy in the disco somewhere on the left side, it's small on the left side, it's dramatic. And Dico was the translator and what she said to me was that her brother was shot down on Wednesday, but she said they can take my brother but they can't take my Friday. So she was in the disco on the Friday night and she was basically giving a two fingers to those who had been up in the hills. And once again, that was the second thing for me, which is the question of peace. And the European project is a project for peace. And that too was resonant with me. But I'm 48 and I'll be 49 next month. So those ideas of democracy, of operating together, of peace, I don't think I've got that much relevance to today. So I think for us now to get a sense of where Europe is going to go, we need to understand how people see Europe now, the good bits and the bad bits, but also then how we can change within the dialogue that Barry just spoke about. So we've got six fantastically brave people here, who are going to offer their opinions, but they're not on the rack. We're just going to be asking them what their views are, but then opening it up to yourselves if you have any strong views. So what I wanted to do was maybe start off and just buy whoever wants to take the cultural and say what Europe means to you, either the good bits or the bad bits, and just to kick it off. Because you're closest. Thanks, Colin. Well, I understand that Europe was about peace originally and that's where it was founded. But to be honest, it feels a little bit like history. I was born in 1996. I've never known anything other than a peaceful Europe that's cooperated with one another. And I remember barely just about the accession to the East and Poland, but it's not something that's significant. Just kind of for me, they've always just been there. So when people talk of peace, I appreciate it and I understand it, but I don't really feel it. So for me, what Europe is, is opportunity. It's opportunity for Irish people to go abroad, live abroad, work abroad, for people to come here and experience agriculture, for us to get involved on a global stage through kind of, you know, the rotating presidency that you cancelled through our MEPs and things like that. It's opportunity for our politicians to have influence on the global stage. It's opportunity for our citizens. It's just, it's opportunity. That's the one word that sums up Europe for me. It's the opportunity of a brighter, broader future. They just maybe go down the line on this one, mate. Would you just also give, if it's more at the same point, you can just pass on, but if there's anything you have, just about that concept of what is Europe for you? Mostly my experience here, I have my little burgundy book in my hand, Top and Flame, go anywhere. And then I agree to have a voice on the world stage. So I'm going to show that the Cove of Ireland's way of the result. If I decided to do this, that maybe wouldn't happen, I would not have had those voices in my country. Jane? Yeah, I think Cove is the right opportunity to visit other countries, experience other cultures. But I think the societal impact that Europe has had on Ireland and from its laws and regulations and the values of Europe have been important in the future, like equal pay for women or magically rights, things like that. Yeah, there was an awful sense that an awful lot of those rules from Europe actually delivered for us whether it was rights-based culture or even things on the environment. As some of those environment correspond for 10 years, we often felt that if it hadn't been from and needed for Brussels, things would never have happened. But if you're talking about sort of opportunity, if we're talking about jobs, and things not feeling isolated, is there anything else in this that you feel that Europe is a benefit and offers? Because maybe years ago, it was a really simple binary answer. We get more from the EU, monetary, than we give in, so therefore thumbs up to being a member of Europe. Well, I'd agree with all of the secrets and actually what you've said also about the environmental impact, because I don't think that Ireland, I think, can be, we're more of a reactive kind of problem-servant that's what we face with all of the international scale. We don't necessarily have to visually and internally to go for it. But in relation to what Europe would mean to me, it's definitely like the development of the rights-based culture that we actually received from our session into Europe. And then I'd also question the relationship with peace in Europe because now I'm a little bit older. But I do think the obsession grows as it's been more acknowledged now that the rule of law was more of a question because we've seen kind of like instances maybe in Poland and Hungary at the moment that are kind of slightly controversial. But I think it's kind of more of a putting it in the bottom, I think the fact that Europe has realised that and has reiterated the fact that the importance of rule of law in ZDK is in the criteria and the accession process and the fact that Ireland hasn't been put into that, especially on the international scale and the international organisation. Yeah, I mean I think that's one of the big things about how, as we begin to move forward to the all-center of back on ourselves and if we're looking about Europe as a project of peace, as you said, the history. But we're now looking at, you know, closer military cooperation. We're also looking at our involvement with other countries. So that does raise ethical questions about what is it that we want from it? What is this, where are we actually going to do? Well, my view is that, well, I was not born here. Yeah, I was not born here. I knew this year in 2001. I'm British by birth and I'm also French by natural law. So in a sense, I suppose for me it's a bit of an identity crisis so I've been like that for me on the personal level. Whereas my home, I mean I consider who my home is in a sense of being European. It's an idea of I can appreciate that I have privileges and I have protections and rights that other people in the world do not. I, like, sorry, what was your name? Your second name? Sorry, my apologies.  And I went to Belgium back in January and I went to Hungary so I could be in March and I still felt that's something I really value, that I can go there, I can live there, I can tour there, I can study there through Erasmus for example and I just, that's the personal thing but it's something that's what Europe is to me and it's what the European Union is to me and I don't feel that in a nationalist kind of way I don't feel that being European makes me better than someone but that makes me appreciated more than money. That's to a certain extent to be being passive and haven't had to but now, let's say, something like the United Kingdom of Brexit is beginning to move away, it's forces for what to be want and it's actually quite an interesting time or provocative time where we're getting all sorts of ideas about where we might go but as you said, Barry talked about maybe one of the options is to strip everything back to just an economic model or we're just going back to the EEC, just the idea of trade and being able to get a job anyway and not having to go through all those difficulties, you can just get a plane of girls you think that's super market as well so you strip back like you talked about Norway well the Norway model wasn't, was modeled on what Norway's circumstances goes we don't consider that it's no one size bit it's a whole scenario so as I say, Norway's a brilliant example for Norway and what's your own sense of that? I kind of feel like on the super national level it's brilliant because it connects all these other states that gave them a sense of identity and it's great that we can hop on a plane and go wherever and get a job and live there and commit to their processes but I feel that on a social level people don't know what the EU actually does like we're looking off to have the education to tell us so this is what the EU is this is the economic policy for social laws you can't really do so on the street but they'll have a rough idea but they won't know so they'll have a lower turnout and that's broken for European elections and then they can't get any views so I feel like they're there but they're like a foreign budget certainly they kind of need to make their presence a bit more felt possibly in a positive way because at the moment in Ireland we're looking at things like the Apple tax taxes and some people that are like oh it's positive because the city we're enforcing directives and rules but people are like well it's jeopardising our foreign investments our foreign companies and all this so it's really not a good thing for Ireland it's the same line so I feel like if they were there more socially we'd have more educated opinions on these things and in terms of referendum voting for MPs we'd probably excel in more that issue of information is huge I mean I was a Europe correspondent for RT for five years so I was based in Brussels trying to deal with the deluge of information and ministers take Patrick O'Donovan who's on the general affairs council in Brussels but I'd say is there anyone in the room who knows what Patrick O'Donovan was doing yesterday? so I think there's an does Patrick O'Donovan? no that's not thank you so I think there is an issue a need for the minister to communicate back and then there's also the responsibility on media and their duty of informing people in an unbiased manner as to what's happening as well so that's a current issue just on that question of the future is there anyone who's got particularly strong views on what way do they believe Europe should be going one of the questions Barry posed is and it's something which I quote what Jean-Claude Juncker was speaking about in his direction he was saying Europe needs to do the big things better and get out of the smalls so if there's got an overview a direction to where it's going that's good but what shouldn't we be doing is fiddling around in member states and just getting people's backs up that's a key point and I want to go up and down the panel I'll just ask if anyone has particular strong views as to what the EU should be doing what the future should look like I think on the white paper that Barry mentioned we should be going towards the fifth scenario doing more together both before we can do that the communication has to be sorted out from Europe as to what their goals are why they're doing this and how they're going to get there because people don't understand that when they have this negative Eurosceptic view of the European Union for example we had somebody giving a guest lecture yesterday I can't remember his name and he was the head of the European Parliament office in Dublin he said that during election times the European Parliament has an information campaign about what they do but they should really be doing that continuously so that people understand what they're doing and what they're doing what they're doing like you said that they want to focus more on the bigger things and get out the small things but how can they commit to the bigger things if they haven't got all the small things in line it's really like the many like the one rather than the one completes the many so if you're looking at each individual country how can they enforce a single market if people are going against the directives against cooperation law and stuff like that within the EU so they have to look at the small things before they can look at the big thing as an overall picture so the big steps and then you can start going I think the same which you mentioned in your precinct like I agree that means the search itself more we need more people like Bishaga in being able to say sorry what you're doing is contrary to what you're obliged to do and you need more and it does need to be searched not just in that manner but also in communication as well there is a communication depth and information I think the information is there in space you can type in your upper body you can find all the information there but your average job on the street is not going to know that my joy question does your average job on the street know much about Irish but it is a media issue as well it is something you mentioned with the media bias as well the fact that the media in the case of the United Kingdom it is the fact that there is no civic education per se or not enough civic education of how we communicated to people how the processes work how politics works at institutional levels rather than people here I mean the media is always going to be when they're picking up Barry here again he touched on it in the speech where he spoke about shifting the thing back on that way when he spoke about politicians and internationalising failure so when it works it's all down to them and when it all goes horribly wrong they say it's bad Brussels and they've got it wrong so there's a and then when a journalist is reporting they're reporting what's said not necessarily always getting the editorial context to it and some messages get pushed but not necessarily the full context being delivered to the audience and in the world of Bright Parks and Fox and everything else I think we're getting a lot of attention but being able to discern the truth but it's hard and that also comes back to lecturers and being able to give us all the critical thinking to be able to discern for yourself as to what you're being told why you're being told it by you and being able to make an educated and guess on it but it's a massive challenge for just maybe just from the audience point of view just on that opening thing of where we should be going and what services it is to the European Parliament Ambassador School Programme basically to raise awareness among our young people you know what is the EU and what is the European Parliament you know there was a huge response there was an application process for these students to get involved in this and there were more applicants and there were places so we had to we had to read their application form and the reasons they gave were wanting to do the program it was quite astonishing about the future of Europe the fears that it's all going to fragment and what's going to happen are we going to be isolated out here in the middle of the little anti-voting again all on our own but there has been you know a very very very strong response from those young people they are interested they want to learn more and they want to get involved I think this is a great opportunity for them this new program this is only the second year but just on a personal level my grievance with the Irish approach to the European Union has been I don't feel they have been there shaping the direction of Europe it's been too much emphasis on what can we get out of it and I think that has to change you know we've got to take our place strongly in Europe as leaders with a vision rather than as people who are looking at it as much money as we can if I can come back to the panel then just on one of the big issues which John mentioned at the top was the question of Brexit obviously it's complicated and sometimes nasty debates that's happening but is there anything positive that comes from it if even the question that we begin to think of why we are in the European Union and what the benefits are just in relation it's linking your question on the ladies statement there giving Ireland an opportunity to come out from behind say Britain's shadow to take a stance and lead on our own to show that we are innovative thought for the leaders and that we can make a difference even though we are such a small country that our inputs are important so even the red line stance that we'll take on say the partition and the border patrol or non border patrol or however that plays out and then really start to dig out our own like foundations in Europe and build on what we've already we already have a good reputation in Europe but we just need to build on it and show that we are not just thought for the leaders. Because say for example the Department of Foreign Affairs would look at a point to its white paper and say well say things like hunger that's something that is an Irish priority they would want things like the death penalty and I think that those general nodding of heads here when you say Ireland's leading in debates you just don't see it so is that something that here we could be doing which would once again give them more of a reference and profile for Ireland and the European Union Well I totally agree with that but I think it does and I know a certain colleague in the audience who has said that Ireland this actually does give Ireland an opportunity to make alliances to assert itself within the European Union and globally more so than just as the lady said just seeing what can we get out of this really you know we're in it for an economic issue I think Ireland has taken for too long a similar approach to British health in seeing what is our agenda in all of this rather than seeing what can we give back to it what can we actually engage with if we have a seat at this table and I think but I think that's the teacher whatever you might say about his visit to France and saying that France will be Ireland Ireland's most important ally after Britain leaves I think that's quite true especially when you look at areas such as agriculture that France will be France as one example will be of primary importance as an ally and I think that's a positive sign France has been when it came to agriculture I mean we sometimes are viewed as being tied to the Brits but it wasn't really true and I think that from Brad's point of view associating aside from Macron reflects the European view that Macron is a real deal to use the person who's going to be pushing and if you're going to be associated with anyone he's the one who wants to be out but did you want to get in there? I just wanted to say that I think whatever hope we have is around the European table and like when Shane Ross if he goes to see Kim Jong-un I don't think he's going to have a whole lot of look in terms of influencing policy but if he's going to be in the hands of table he does he's one of the 27 that will be left and his voice will be heard and has to be listened to and I suppose that just commands respect and influence in itself I read in the white paper there that by 2060 the EU 27 I won't be less than 4% of the world population if that and that's why I'd like to see Europe kind of do more together as scenario 5 because it wasn't the paper and break countries passes that will move on I think we were talking about how Ireland could project towards the European Union if you look at the other way about how Brussels projects itself back into Ireland I mean the big one of the big stories of the past couple of weeks was the Apple tax issue and how did you see that someone important in Brussels telling Ireland you're wrong and we're going to get you how did that play out how did you see the messaging changing I think if I think if countries rules or tax codes are advantaging multinational corporations then the Commission should step in and stop it because ultimately it's distorting the common market but it's also it's also against the citizens of that country and the European Union should be about nation state and the citizens of the nation state any of us did you see it as a negative thing I see it as a bit of a negative thing because the ECG or ECJ just added to our retreat they're doing their jobs and it sounds more like the same but we haven't taken the opportunity to take it and now we're forcing you to take a fraction of it and we went in my view would be it's a waste of the taxpayer's money because think about the portion even if we don't get the whole amount take the portion of the health and what it could go towards in terms of like we're facing a homeless crisis the whole talking about abortion the whole water bills and then there you have RTDs taking extra pay rises and everything so like that money could be used towards helping those reshape Ireland and making it a more positive place anyone else want to comment on that one just because it was running for a while just on the tax case I thought it was a great thing as an Irish politician when you're dealing with a company as big as Apple we have a turnover probably the same size as our old economy but not bigger it can be difficult to turn around and say look I'm going to make this decision that's going to hurt you because they have sway they employ however many thousands and they contribute so much to our GDP and then this woman from Europe came in and did us a massive favour that she ruled against them and we didn't have to take credit for making that decision that hurt Apple and we kind of threw it back in their face and said no we'll appeal it I just thought she did us a massive favour and I find our tax policies hard to defend sometimes as well like when you're talking to students from the continent it's not something I'm really comfortable with the fact that we are a bit of a tax haven and if you take it that way one of the arguments is we need to have some advantage over a power house like France and on that basis Europe needs to be flexible to be allowed until some federal nirvana down the road but Europe needs to be flexible to allow Ireland to have some sort of competitive advantage to attract otherwise everything will rush to the centre and the periphery will be left behind does that carry any weight? It does and to be honest I don't really have a coherent response to that but I just I think that in a time when you see homelessness and the water charges and all that and then we try and defend the fact that we're not taxing these corporations at all and they're here and they're benefitting from our infrastructure they need to contribute their fair share maybe we don't need to charge them maybe there doesn't need to be tax harmonisation 20% across the EU if we got the 12.5% we might be doing well I take that point very much that in some cases if you're small you don't feel you can stand up to a corporation or the bad boy business for you then it's actually an advantage I mean one of the most controversial things is going to be of the imagine the security policy into the future and we've always said that we're neutral but when you ask people about what our neutrality was it seemed to be somewhat flexible as well far from principle we were I remember for the first time when Irish forces were working under the Parties of the Peace and under Native Directions and former Yugoslavia and once again of seeing Ireland move we had a triple lock we have to have a passport though it has to be passed by the EU and security council we're just beginning to look out and beyond what we may want to do what do you want for Ireland to do in the context of Europe it's internal security and it's borders and when the wake of you writes it down ahead the border comes out if there is one, if there isn't we're definitely going to need to know what way to go through the agreement towards seven terms and everything but within the White Paper basically says that they're going to share information and help each other within the member states but really what can they offer us in terms of Brexit in terms of security how will they help us how will they come to our aid will it be financial will it be military aid will it be the way they had and what can we give back to them so like obviously France and Germany and Brussels have horrible incidents from terrorism and being peacekeepers is that all we can really do to keep peace or is there a way that we can intervene and kind of help prevent these horrible terrorist attacks yeah I mean it's interesting that we have rail cars due to go to Mali in coming weeks and that's in relation to our defence forces so we're down there at Bamacorn working around the world is there anything that anyone have to feel strongly that should be neutral this is like a red line or are we being more flexible and say like you say it's a given take that we will go here on the basis of where we're going there's going to be some reciprocal arrangements to say we'll have very strong views on I think like you said that we can only just point to the airport in Shannon the US Air Base it's always been a bit of a facade in Mali people and I think that Ireland's security and future security concerns actually fall into that greater European question of European defence and it's that I think okay Ireland is not an enemy of NATO it has but I think that the future of NATO itself is in question in the sense that Ireland's ambiguity over its ambivalence over whether it is for its nature or not mind you I think that that's been a long time making it has been an ambiguity in the US so I think that a European defence community is on the cards not a European army but I'm not talking about one force by one rule talking about integrating militaries and sharing information security information intelligence I think that that is very much on the cards and I think Ireland needs to strongly consider it it might it might seem like a distant thing here a lot of people say that I'm the paper one time and someone said because it said actually that armed guarding units were being deployed to certain cities in light of the London terrorist attacks and someone said oh but I don't understand we never colonised anyone why would anyone want to attack you and I was thinking clearly this person doesn't realise that this is a global issue this is not something to do this is something that we really need to to consider and I think was it Barak who he said himself he was considering establishing a Congress-style committee so I think that's a positive sign and I think it is interlinking with European defence for many it used to be an article of faith of Ireland we were independent and on that basis it allowed us as a country which never colonised to be able to go out and integrate with other EU debt gave us a position of principle of looking towards the next 20 or 30 years maybe that's as you mentioned in response to my great idea in Europe maybe that's history too does anyone have an answer I was just going to take you sorry sorry just in relation to terrorist attacks and the Irish neutrality question like there is flexibility on Irish neutrality obviously before peacekeeping even within the UN was never necessarily to carry the charger off the UN in a way in which to use your neutrality and peaceful status within the global community not just the EU to go into areas of severe conflict to manage to be observers peaceful observers to try and maintain some kind of ceasefire or threat to peace and I do think that there is an importance of sharing information technology I think that needs to be transnational I think happy borders on that but the use of force I think particularly in international law it's very difficult to define so to gain some legal threat or their legal stance on Irish neutrality without defining kind of their parameters on terrorism and on state militant actors I think we're done for the gun of it do you know I think we need to really define it internationally then filter it down and have it for proper negotiation and not just attack it so there is neutrality because use of force should always be the end like it should be after exercising all of their end possibilities it's definitely a last ditch attempt I just noticed that talking about security people mean internal security terrorist threat but nobody mentioned Russia and it's hybrid warfare and I think it's serious question so what members of the panel think about this I think it's absolutely great Russia would have been my other consideration for terms of security I think that a European defence association whatever you want to call it an alternative to NATO for successful NATO is strongly important especially when you look at the relationship between well again ambivalence of Trump towards the likes of Putin is seeming aloofness when it comes to Russian aggression especially in Ukraine we're not saying that the situation in Ukraine is back in life sorry not just Russia but also when you consider Turkey and the Sultan is very well resurgent with power and attempting to attempting to essentially I think say to Europe you know we don't need you anymore we can do it our own way and it's a sense of I think we're starting to see resurgence of hegemony in local politics and do you think that's a I'm just wondering as we're talking about this do you think not only security brings back the actual border to and isn't something where it remains within the confidence of states and you're going to have different rules in different places as we saw on the Mediterranean because when Guy Verhofstadt was in the Irish parliament dealing mainly with Brexit one of the big things he had as a strong federalist was that we need to have some logic that's simply illogical to have different nation states with different borders with different forces operating differently that you need to have uniformity in the European tradition so that seems to be taking a step further down the road once again that what Europe needs to do is to integrate to have that more collective operation for it to be more streamlined and if you go back far maybe you're talking about some form of federalism is that something that Europe should be doing they attempted it once and it didn't work out but maybe that wasn't the right era but they needed it they had a refugee crisis everything like in terms of as Michael said along the board do Ukraine maybe we do need a form of a European defence community maybe not the form of an actual army boat and something where it's like you have a squad four stuck out with different people from different member states and obviously intellectually sharing information about suspects and ongoing situations within the country in February of 2014 I was in Kiev when a lot of people were shot in the streets in one day and part of that argument was over an offer that Europe had made to Ukraine and there was a responsibility as a Ukrainian start or at least those who were demonstrating in the by then that there was a responsibility on Europe to deliver on this Francis and they felt that there was some doubt and that does, as you said I think it was an incisive but you need to pull back first and have a logic to it and then be able to apply it as otherwise if you overreach you can end up in a deep trouble really quickly. Yeah actually just on the the uniformity across the EU although I do understand something like maybe a type of security defence force do you find anything that if we kind of if Europe came out and made a statement that Europe was going to push towards complete uniformity across all member states I think it would be rejected straight out I don't think it would get through I do think that there was a massive like positive push with the UNCRPD managing to be ratified by the EU and then obviously but it's because of the power that it's going to be through and I think people if they they feel that they're losing their sovereignty in a quick batch they're going to just do the major reaction and pull out or attempt to pull back and I think we've seen that with the UK and I think to detrimental effects so I think it's softly softly like as has ever been seen in international forums or international communities soft law although lawyers and different people can speak slowly I've just noticed we've got about 5 minutes left before I'm going to hand it back over to John and maybe just because we've been dealing with some of the really difficult and intractable problems that Europe has been facing in the past 3 or 4 years and we were talking earlier on in the beginning about our allies and who we like and who should be in our club now that Britain is left who should we be sort of reaching out to France's vengeance and I'll check your ideas about who we should be piling out like Leo Radker was up meeting the Dutch and only recently he also was in Great Station himself so he was moving east as well seeing any time about this anyone else what ideas about who we should be Denmark Denmark is a terrible event but we let that pass and anyone else because like Germany are a leading economic team in our country in the EU there's basically viewpoints that Germany and France kind of run the EU as it is so if we in the EU or if we join up with countries in terms of economic trade that we feel are economically strong down in my council nose it's interesting that our teacher has gone to Paris but he hasn't gone to Britain and it's kind of like a phase of Britain and anyone else just socially I think it'd be quite interesting for maybe Belgium they have a lot of human rights and social and policy and social dimensions in Ireland it's obviously in the last couple of years maybe I don't know whether I could say it's right or wrong we've made strides in certain human rights forums and I think globally we are I think that maybe that we could build on like our social importance social conscience and human rights defenders with the likes of do you know maybe some of the Scandinavians in our big Belgium just to kind of create a partnership in a stronghold maybe I mean Belgium's fascinating just because if you go into say some of the Flemish towns the only place you will see a national flag is hanging off the outside of the state building in the lieutenant outside of that you don't see no Belgian flag I think as well Belgium is taking a more pragmatic approach to the EU as well well perhaps they are I mean perhaps to a degree is value human but as well I think there's in economic terms socio-economic terms they take a pragmatic approach but really at the heart of Belgium would be a fragmented identity really it's very sure so maybe if I haven't come back to you just wondering from you I think you will most like to see me I think it was a great suggestion to look on to Scandinavia Ireland's now the worst in climate change index in Europe something that we should focus on I mean in terms of the future more in a social cohesion I agree with the white paper on that we need to do more things together on the ability studio as I said on the same page and even on the same page towards the right direction I mean it is an expression that check is in the post I think when it comes to climate change the bill is in the post very soon we're going to have to cough up for Professor John Sweeney of Manouf University who has described us as derelict in our duty and has continued on bringing the values actually involved at the moment once again continuing to do it although he's supposedly retired but he's campaigning on it just in the way that Ireland has been viewed in Europe we have a lot of positives going for us and I found this both meeting Europeans coming here and travelling in different parts of Europe there's a very positive attitude towards Ireland leave aside the apple tax thing for a minute we heard from a former UK conference here in Manouf a week or two ago and he confirmed that that going around Europe there is a positive attitude I think part of it is because obviously we never colonised anybody our record in the UN in relation to peacekeeping has been exemplary in most cases and I think that possibly the whole thing of Irish and Yutrarch we need to move away from the old idea of what kicking the bridge and start looking more positively towards how we can help in the common defence of Europe I do think if Ireland advertised for friends they'd have people queuing outside the patient's door I'd like to thank our people so bravely standing forward and I'd ask Charles to come up now and just make some closing remarks thank you very much Paul you were going so well until you mentioned Denmark when you asked are there any days here they're all probably still out there we've all celebrated I really want to thank our six student panel members I thought their remarks were really illuminating really interesting and I think it was wonderful for once to reverse the equation and have the experts up here rather than down there listening to people like me who are usually winging it a lot of the time and one of the things that comes through so importantly is that of communicating Europe there are enormous deficits of communication at national level in particular at EU level as well but particularly at national level and so I really welcome the Minister's Citizens Initiative I hope that it takes place on a regular basis right throughout the country in multiple kind of platforms because the more we converse about these issues the better the better will be the better for it I first went to a meeting with the team bringing Europe closer to the citizens 20 years ago in the run up to the Amsterdam treaty referendum and I never thought actually that those who were running these events were very serious either in Brussels or in Dublin but now I think there's been a change and it really struck me yesterday looking at the Minister's launch of the Citizens Dialogue in 1931 or 1932 the Taoiseach is 1938 or 1939 no longer the youngest Prime Minister in Europe but that's significant and Minister Coventry similarly so there are all people that have actually I think internalized Europe from school days or from university days onwards it's worth remembering Erasmus has been a big part of that we really value our Erasmus students here when I teach European Union politics people who come in through Erasmus make a fantastic contribution we learn all kinds of things about the way things are processed and internalized everywhere we should also remember that the Erasmus program has been responsible for would you believe it 3 million babies that have been born since 1989 this is astonishing statistic interdependence, interpenetration I don't know what the truth is this has produced things that are really really important I really struck also by our colleague from the school next door who I've talked about the schools and the point you make about civic education which others have made as well really important something we've done really poorly over the years in Ireland in general but especially on Europe now that is changing actually the Blue Star program which the European movement is involved at a primary school level I was delighted to hear you mentioned the European Parliament program for civic and social political education that's really promising as well the part of it on the EU is really well thought through and written and if that's rolled out on a more serious basis that should also I think begin to make a difference and there's also a role for individuals if you join a political party you should ensure I think that there is a European focus to activity and discussions if you're part of a political party in university you get to be part of the wider European family it's laboured through the socialists and democrats and so on so all of that I think is really important in that civic sense people taking responsibility as well as expecting government to do the communicating the second point the final one a number of speakers mentioned the need for Ireland to be serious about its European vocation and to be part of the core of European Union politics I think that's really important I'm sick to death of hearing arguments about Ireland being on the periphery and especially once Britain leaves we're going to struggle that's not the case any longer I don't think it was particularly the case 20 years ago we're in an entirely different position economically and we should be at the core with the Netherlands with Denmark and other countries and with France and Germany and with Anastasia actively helping to shape the agenda of the European Union of the future and that also I think is important in respect of alliances it's anybody's guess as to how we're going to do in the council without Britain Paula rightly pointed out there are no permanent alliances within the council we really do align very closely with France on agriculture and not with Britain historically but that is changing all states such as the Baltic states and others I think are going to be crucially important so I want to thank everybody about here on the panel and in the audience who are coming along for contributing to such an incredibly vibrant conversation the first I hope of many that I'm going to be at in the months and years to come with Europe at the centre I also want to take the opportunity to thank Barry Andrews colleagues Hannah DC and Vanoula and others who have a relatively short notice how to put this event together it's been a pleasure to work with you as always you did fantastically good work and we really appreciate it and actually where we can actually combine and co-host I think it's a very useful part of this the way we might process Europe in the future I also want to thank Paul for giving us time as an ORTB operative that's the best word he is hugely busy all the time and he's given us also the benefits of his career in Brussels the time he's spent as a foreign correspondent in Ukraine, Bosnia and elsewhere so thanks very very much indeed for agreeing to facilitate Paul and I want to thank everybody who's come today just to listen and to partake and to participate so thank you all very very much indeed