The Starting Point is Border Control

The most important things is that we should reflect what people think, and a lot of people are scared. Especially because of last year, when hundred thousands walked through Europe without control, security, identity checks and this created fear. That was the starting point on the huge debate on migration and it's extremely important for politicians to recognize that people are afraid of this development, that's why we have to give a proper answer. The starting point is border protection. Last year I met Viktor Orbán in Budapest when he was starting to build up the fence to strengthen the controls on the border with Serbia, to show that yes, border control is important.

The will is there, the European Commission proposed a lot of legislative changes to strengthen the executive capacity of the European Border and Coast guard agency (Frontex) to do their job. But there's the sovereignty of the member states for which Hungary is also fighting. Greece is not allowing us to do what is needed at the border, we have limited possibilities. My party, on the European level is in favour of strengthening our European capacity to do this. If Greece fails to protect the external border, then Frontex must go there and do the job. Everybody in Europe, in Cologne, Paris, Madrid, Budapest - everybody expects that our Schengen border is well-protected and if for example Hungary can do this on its own, then it is fine, and if not, then Europe has to intervene and implement the current rules. Efficient border control is the precondition of any further discussion on refugee measures.

Both. It was an extremely important signal that “Macedonia” (FYROM) closed its border to Greece. The message was "full stop, our borders are controlled". Afterwards it was obvious that without the implementation of the EU-Turkey agreement we would have faced enormous problems in Greece, that's why both steps were important. The most important thing of the agreement is that there are less people dying while trying to reach the shores of Europe, and we have less migrants here. Greek authorities should implement the hotspot measures which guarantee that we can send illegals as soon as possible back to Turkey. This is a big achievement that Turkey is ready to accept them back. All our ambition to clarify the border control, especially on the Turkish-Greek border are now much better than one year ago, this is an achievement, a success for all of us, for the Hungarian engagement on the Balkan route together with others, all the negotiations of the EU Heads of state and government in Brussels with President Erdogan, so all these steps lead to a situation where we have much less refugees and that is very positive. The state must have the control over the refugees, not the smugglers.

Before we start internal solidarity the precondition is strict border control. We have to guarantee that those who arrive in Europe are real refugees, not illegal migrants. The next step is that if we have hotspots in Lampedusa or Lesbos. To a real refugee from for example Aleppo, who is fleeing bombs with children, Europe cannot say "I don't care". That can't be the answer, also because of the Christian identity of our continent. So the second part is that we should contribute. We should invest in third countries, neighbourhoods of conflict zones, Turkey, Jordan or Lebanon and we have to ensure the money is well spent. If refugees are coming to Europe we have to find a way that everybody contributes to the burden they create. When we talk about real refugees, there is a responsibility. For me and the EPP group the model of flexible solidarity presented by the V4 countries is a good step towards successful negotiations. We have to find a middle way, but everybody has to contribute.

I respect the outcome of the referendum. I think left wing politicians all over Europe, - like Luxemburg's Foreign Minister, Jean Asselborn, who publicly said that "Orbán lost and I don't care anymore about the Hungarian perspective" - are totally wrong and even arrogant. We have to respect the concerns of the people. On the other hand I have to say that to describe Europe as a Europe of bureaucrats, people who don't know what is going on in the world is also totally wrong. It's not bureaucrats who decide on things but MEPs , Commissioners, Ministers and Heads of state and government - Hungarians too, like Mr Orbán in the European Council, Mr Navracsics in the European Commission. At the Council of Ministers Hungary is mostly in favour of the decisions. Since July 2014, out of 148 votes, the Hungarian government has only voted five times against a proposal. It's not acceptable for me that you are voting as a Hungarian representative in favour of a dossier in the Council, and then at home you are criticising it. We are deciding about Europe, not "they". If you allow the wording that an external power is deciding about Hungary then we destroy the idea of the European Union. Not even Germany can decide alone, everybody has to accept the democratic results at the end. So I ask everyone to respect the national perspective, but also to respect the outcome of the negotiations on a European level. Europe is not the sum of 28 egoisms, but a compromise.

We had in Germany the same debate which we faced on a European level between only welcoming and border protection. I think we are close to an agreement between CDU and CSU, which must reflect the two sides of the medal. One is that we cannot make Europe a fortress, we should help if help is needed, but on the other hand we have to be in control of our security. Chancellor Angela Merkel admitted a few weeks ago that not everything the German government did during the last years was good. This was a clear signal that we have to find a common way. Also on a European level we have to move towards a compromise, we have to close this intensive, emotional debate.

Our party sticks to the upper limit approach, because there is obviously for every country a maximum capacity to accept refugees. There is still a debate. We asked CDU to move on this field.

First comes content, then personnel issues: We have to decide about our program, and then about the candidate. In my party there's a clear understanding that we shouldn't only see Angela Merkel as the chancellor of the refugees. On that issue we have debates, different opinions and that's normal in a political family. But Angela Merkel for us is also the chancellor of 10 years growth in Germany and one of the leading politicians globally. She's extremely respected and if she wants to run again we will fight for her.

It's not only a German, but a European challenge. My first message is that if you try to copy populists and nationalists, their wording, their message, then you make them even stronger. People are not stupid, people understand that we are serious politicians and that we only try to copy them. You can see an example in Slovakia, where Robert Fico tried to put migration in the centre of his campaign and the result was that the social democratic party lost 20 percent and they have to extreme right parties in the parliament. But on the other hand, we have to address the concerns of the people. We are in government, we are the biggest group in the EP, we have the power to decide, we have to take responsibility. People have to see that we deliver substantial decisions, serious work to solve the problems, we are not just making a show.

We have to show people a clear message that the state is in control, the state decides who can stay and who should go. Readmission agreements must work on a European level and if a partner country is not cooperating, we have to consider cutting their development aid. Because we shouldn't be naive, we cannot spend aid money if they are not cooperating. So there are two sides of this: we cannot exclude those who need help, but we have to be tough on those who only misuse the system.