WEBVTT - EU Justice Commissioner Michael McGrath Talks US Trade, Data Protection

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:07.000
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.

0:00:07.720 --> 0:00:09.319
<v Speaker 2>We're watching out of course for any more news on

0:00:09.360 --> 0:00:12.040
<v Speaker 2>the EUUs trade talks. But another big event is happening

0:00:12.080 --> 0:00:14.800
<v Speaker 2>here in Brussels today. The European Commission due to present

0:00:14.840 --> 0:00:17.400
<v Speaker 2>its plan for its next seven year budget for the EU,

0:00:17.440 --> 0:00:19.920
<v Speaker 2>which will be worth well over a trillion euros. It's

0:00:19.960 --> 0:00:22.320
<v Speaker 2>the start of a long political process that we'll have

0:00:22.640 --> 0:00:26.120
<v Speaker 2>far reaching consequences for the EU's future. Joining me now

0:00:26.160 --> 0:00:28.120
<v Speaker 2>in studio to discuss that and more as the EU's

0:00:28.120 --> 0:00:31.360
<v Speaker 2>Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, Rule of Law and Consumer Protection,

0:00:31.480 --> 0:00:35.360
<v Speaker 2>Michael mcgra Michael McGraw, Good morning, Good morning, Stephen Bloomberg Radio. Now,

0:00:35.400 --> 0:00:37.320
<v Speaker 2>you have a very large portfolio, as your job title

0:00:37.320 --> 0:00:39.040
<v Speaker 2>attests too, but I did want to just start with

0:00:39.080 --> 0:00:41.240
<v Speaker 2>that issue of trade, where of course waiting to see

0:00:41.280 --> 0:00:44.320
<v Speaker 2>what might happen on that front. Can a deal be

0:00:44.400 --> 0:00:46.600
<v Speaker 2>done by the first of August? The time is ticking

0:00:46.640 --> 0:00:47.400
<v Speaker 2>away now.

0:00:47.960 --> 0:00:50.760
<v Speaker 1>Yes, I believe it can. We have two weeks ahead.

0:00:50.920 --> 0:00:54.600
<v Speaker 1>I think of intense negotiations. It is in everybody's interests

0:00:54.640 --> 0:00:57.400
<v Speaker 1>that there is a deal, that we achieve trade peace,

0:00:57.680 --> 0:01:00.760
<v Speaker 1>and that we secure a stable turn of trade for

0:01:00.840 --> 0:01:04.480
<v Speaker 1>businesses on both sides of the Atlantic. This is the

0:01:04.520 --> 0:01:07.720
<v Speaker 1>most important trade and investment relationship in the world between

0:01:07.760 --> 0:01:12.520
<v Speaker 1>the EU and US. It is unquestionably mutually beneficial, supporting

0:01:12.640 --> 0:01:16.080
<v Speaker 1>millions of jobs in both the US and the EU.

0:01:16.800 --> 0:01:23.120
<v Speaker 1>These are challenging, complex negotiations. We were surprised and disappointed

0:01:23.160 --> 0:01:27.160
<v Speaker 1>to receive the letter last weekend flagging the possibility of

0:01:27.520 --> 0:01:33.080
<v Speaker 1>thirty percent tariffs because the negotiations had been progressing well overall,

0:01:33.440 --> 0:01:37.160
<v Speaker 1>and we remain focused as an EU on the substantive

0:01:37.360 --> 0:01:40.480
<v Speaker 1>discussions because it's a big prize if we can secure

0:01:40.880 --> 0:01:43.640
<v Speaker 1>an agreement and we can do what we do best

0:01:43.680 --> 0:01:48.080
<v Speaker 1>in the EU, which is export goods and services all

0:01:48.080 --> 0:01:50.320
<v Speaker 1>over the world, and we want to give our businesses

0:01:50.600 --> 0:01:52.880
<v Speaker 1>the certainty that they need so that they can make

0:01:52.920 --> 0:01:55.440
<v Speaker 1>decisions in camera waters Now.

0:01:55.320 --> 0:01:57.160
<v Speaker 2>I mentioned as well the YOUU bodget so the Commission

0:01:57.160 --> 0:01:58.880
<v Speaker 2>proposal due to be published later. I know you can't

0:01:58.920 --> 0:02:00.200
<v Speaker 2>go into the details of what's going to be in

0:02:00.240 --> 0:02:03.400
<v Speaker 2>that unfortunately, but as a former finance minister, I wonder

0:02:03.680 --> 0:02:06.840
<v Speaker 2>how you view this process and how difficult it's going

0:02:06.920 --> 0:02:10.200
<v Speaker 2>to be because there are a lot of pressures financially

0:02:10.240 --> 0:02:12.840
<v Speaker 2>on the EU repaying the debt being some of that

0:02:12.960 --> 0:02:14.960
<v Speaker 2>as well. Is this going to be a very difficult

0:02:15.040 --> 0:02:16.040
<v Speaker 2>budget negotiation?

0:02:16.800 --> 0:02:18.400
<v Speaker 1>It will, and it's certainly a lengthy one, as you

0:02:18.400 --> 0:02:22.040
<v Speaker 1>alluded to yourself, because the current multi annual financial framework

0:02:22.120 --> 0:02:24.600
<v Speaker 1>runs to the end of twenty twenty seven, and in

0:02:24.639 --> 0:02:26.400
<v Speaker 1>the EU you have a lot of stakeholders. You have

0:02:26.400 --> 0:02:29.960
<v Speaker 1>the twenty seven member states, you have the European Parliament.

0:02:30.520 --> 0:02:33.800
<v Speaker 1>The Commission will make the proposal, and it is being

0:02:33.840 --> 0:02:38.120
<v Speaker 1>framed and challenging circumstances with the capital repayments on the

0:02:38.160 --> 0:02:42.200
<v Speaker 1>COVID loans next generation EU beginning to be repaid from

0:02:42.240 --> 0:02:46.320
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty eight, so that does place additional pressure that

0:02:46.360 --> 0:02:49.320
<v Speaker 1>could be twenty to twenty five billion euro every year.

0:02:49.320 --> 0:02:51.840
<v Speaker 1>So that's the first call on the budget as such,

0:02:52.320 --> 0:02:57.200
<v Speaker 1>and we have to consider what our appropriate new own resources.

0:02:57.240 --> 0:03:00.760
<v Speaker 1>Where the EU will seek to raise additional revenue, we

0:03:00.840 --> 0:03:03.000
<v Speaker 1>have to have an understanding of how much the member

0:03:03.080 --> 0:03:06.760
<v Speaker 1>states are also willing to pay in and also then

0:03:06.800 --> 0:03:09.959
<v Speaker 1>decide on the level of prioritization across a whole range

0:03:10.000 --> 0:03:13.880
<v Speaker 1>of different spending programs. Ultimately, the adoption of a multi

0:03:13.919 --> 0:03:18.440
<v Speaker 1>annual EU budget is subject to unanimity among the member states.

0:03:18.440 --> 0:03:21.960
<v Speaker 1>So we need every single one eventually to sign off

0:03:21.960 --> 0:03:24.320
<v Speaker 1>and approve it, and then it's subject to the consent

0:03:25.040 --> 0:03:27.600
<v Speaker 1>of the European Parliament. They face a yes or no

0:03:27.720 --> 0:03:30.839
<v Speaker 1>question and at the very end of the process, so yes,

0:03:30.919 --> 0:03:34.880
<v Speaker 1>I think two years of tough negotiations ahead. Today is

0:03:34.920 --> 0:03:39.119
<v Speaker 1>a significant day though, where the Commission agrees. Hopefully later

0:03:39.200 --> 0:03:41.520
<v Speaker 1>on this morning, I'll be going to the College meeting

0:03:41.880 --> 0:03:45.240
<v Speaker 1>directly after this interview, and I hope that we will

0:03:45.240 --> 0:03:48.680
<v Speaker 1>be in a position to agree the draft budget that

0:03:48.720 --> 0:03:49.880
<v Speaker 1>the Commission can propose.

0:03:50.440 --> 0:03:53.280
<v Speaker 2>Okay, now you have previously spoken about using the EU's

0:03:53.320 --> 0:03:56.320
<v Speaker 2>budget as a way to improve rule of law issues

0:03:56.520 --> 0:03:58.280
<v Speaker 2>in the EU, which is a key part of your

0:03:58.320 --> 0:04:02.119
<v Speaker 2>own portfolio. What would that like? Is this cash for reforms?

0:04:03.440 --> 0:04:05.440
<v Speaker 1>So at the moment we do have rule of law

0:04:05.520 --> 0:04:10.440
<v Speaker 1>conditionality built into the budgets. To be fair, the last Commission,

0:04:10.560 --> 0:04:12.920
<v Speaker 1>the Member States and the Parliament all work together to

0:04:12.920 --> 0:04:16.160
<v Speaker 1>build a pretty strong toolbox in the area of rule

0:04:16.200 --> 0:04:18.479
<v Speaker 1>of law. But I think we have to learn from

0:04:18.480 --> 0:04:22.000
<v Speaker 1>the lessons of recent years we have worked that remains

0:04:22.040 --> 0:04:24.160
<v Speaker 1>to be done, as you will have seen in the

0:04:24.240 --> 0:04:26.880
<v Speaker 1>rule of law reports to be published last week for

0:04:26.960 --> 0:04:30.880
<v Speaker 1>every single country of the EU. There are challenges, there

0:04:30.920 --> 0:04:34.839
<v Speaker 1>are outstanding issues. So we have been examining and considering

0:04:34.839 --> 0:04:38.400
<v Speaker 1>what is the best rule of law architecture within the

0:04:38.440 --> 0:04:41.800
<v Speaker 1>next MFF, and I think you will see changes. It's

0:04:41.839 --> 0:04:45.880
<v Speaker 1>no secret that we are moving towards national and regional

0:04:45.960 --> 0:04:49.760
<v Speaker 1>partnership plans, so we do intend to build in by

0:04:49.800 --> 0:04:53.520
<v Speaker 1>design links to reforms as part of those plans, and

0:04:53.600 --> 0:04:55.080
<v Speaker 1>that will include the funds.

0:04:55.480 --> 0:04:59.359
<v Speaker 2>Hasn't really worked. I mean there's been billions frozen, for example,

0:04:59.480 --> 0:05:02.360
<v Speaker 2>for hunger for many months now and there's no progress,

0:05:02.360 --> 0:05:06.080
<v Speaker 2>as your report allated to in addressing some of the

0:05:06.080 --> 0:05:09.919
<v Speaker 2>concerns the EU has. I mean, how much stricter do

0:05:09.960 --> 0:05:10.840
<v Speaker 2>the rules need to be?

0:05:11.400 --> 0:05:15.040
<v Speaker 1>Well, I think we need tools that are more agile

0:05:15.200 --> 0:05:19.080
<v Speaker 1>and flexible so that we can respond more quickly, and

0:05:19.160 --> 0:05:22.320
<v Speaker 1>also so that member states are absolutely clear what the

0:05:22.400 --> 0:05:25.359
<v Speaker 1>expectations in relation to rule of law are and I

0:05:25.360 --> 0:05:28.520
<v Speaker 1>think they really should have no excuses on that front.

0:05:29.360 --> 0:05:33.279
<v Speaker 1>EU law takes primacy. We have our Charter of Fundamental Rights,

0:05:33.680 --> 0:05:36.200
<v Speaker 1>so the requirements are clear. But we are now going

0:05:36.240 --> 0:05:39.560
<v Speaker 1>to build in by design into the new MFF a

0:05:39.600 --> 0:05:42.479
<v Speaker 1>set of architecture that I think will give us a

0:05:42.560 --> 0:05:46.000
<v Speaker 1>very good prospect of achieving better compliance with rule of law,

0:05:46.360 --> 0:05:49.440
<v Speaker 1>which isn't an optional extra It's a core obligation of

0:05:49.520 --> 0:05:53.360
<v Speaker 1>EU membership. And we have a set of tools currently

0:05:53.400 --> 0:05:56.520
<v Speaker 1>that I think can be refined, can be improved, and

0:05:56.600 --> 0:05:57.760
<v Speaker 1>can make a positive difference.

0:05:58.080 --> 0:05:59.960
<v Speaker 2>Later today, you're going to be speaking to businesses about

0:06:00.080 --> 0:06:03.400
<v Speaker 2>the ease Data Protection rules the GDPR. You've already come

0:06:03.480 --> 0:06:05.120
<v Speaker 2>up with some proposals that will ease some of the

0:06:05.120 --> 0:06:08.400
<v Speaker 2>burden of those rules for small businesses. What sort of

0:06:08.480 --> 0:06:12.000
<v Speaker 2>further changes could businesses expect on that more simplification.

0:06:13.120 --> 0:06:15.520
<v Speaker 1>We are looking at this through the lens of simplification.

0:06:16.240 --> 0:06:20.039
<v Speaker 1>I really want to hear from businesses, but other stakeholders

0:06:20.080 --> 0:06:24.120
<v Speaker 1>too about what their practical day to day experience of

0:06:24.279 --> 0:06:29.760
<v Speaker 1>GDPR is. GDPR is a global standard set by the EU.

0:06:29.880 --> 0:06:33.040
<v Speaker 1>It is also treaty based, and we have an extensive

0:06:33.080 --> 0:06:36.359
<v Speaker 1>amount of case law within the European Union from the

0:06:36.400 --> 0:06:41.200
<v Speaker 1>Court of Justice. So for me, the question is, can

0:06:41.240 --> 0:06:46.159
<v Speaker 1>we achieve the same very high standard of protection of

0:06:46.200 --> 0:06:49.200
<v Speaker 1>personal data but in a way that is less burdensome,

0:06:49.560 --> 0:06:52.839
<v Speaker 1>or in a way that can be simplified for those

0:06:52.880 --> 0:06:55.600
<v Speaker 1>who carry the obligation. And I want to hear directly

0:06:55.640 --> 0:06:59.360
<v Speaker 1>from all of the stakeholders about their experience. No doubt

0:06:59.360 --> 0:07:01.560
<v Speaker 1>they will have many ideas. We do need to be

0:07:01.640 --> 0:07:05.760
<v Speaker 1>careful because the protection of personal data is in our

0:07:05.880 --> 0:07:09.320
<v Speaker 1>Charter of Fundamental Rights. It is a key pillar of

0:07:09.640 --> 0:07:12.320
<v Speaker 1>the legal a key within the European Union. That will

0:07:12.360 --> 0:07:14.640
<v Speaker 1>remain the case. But can we do it in a

0:07:14.640 --> 0:07:17.600
<v Speaker 1>way that eases the burden and companies and others. That's

0:07:17.640 --> 0:07:20.040
<v Speaker 1>the question that we'll be seeking to answer. And today

0:07:20.080 --> 0:07:22.680
<v Speaker 1>is an important milestone because we'll have what we call

0:07:22.720 --> 0:07:26.000
<v Speaker 1>an implementation dialogue and we will then reflect on what

0:07:26.080 --> 0:07:29.600
<v Speaker 1>we have heard and consider whether we can frame proposals

0:07:29.960 --> 0:07:30.640
<v Speaker 1>in that regard.

0:07:30.840 --> 0:07:34.080
<v Speaker 2>Is there a risk that by making changes to GDPR

0:07:34.200 --> 0:07:38.160
<v Speaker 2>that you're seen as perhaps following a lead that's coming

0:07:38.160 --> 0:07:41.600
<v Speaker 2>from the US in terms of weakening protections in many

0:07:41.640 --> 0:07:43.680
<v Speaker 2>areas as well? Is that a concern that when you're

0:07:43.720 --> 0:07:46.680
<v Speaker 2>making changes that it's not seen as being following a

0:07:46.760 --> 0:07:48.720
<v Speaker 2>lead that's been taken by the US in this area.

0:07:48.880 --> 0:07:52.480
<v Speaker 1>We don't intend to weaken protections. I can be crystal

0:07:52.560 --> 0:07:57.400
<v Speaker 1>clear on that, because it is a core right of

0:07:57.520 --> 0:08:00.800
<v Speaker 1>EU citizens and we have to defend. Didn't stand over

0:08:00.840 --> 0:08:04.560
<v Speaker 1>that and It's also the case that the EUS GDPR

0:08:05.200 --> 0:08:08.240
<v Speaker 1>is the basis of a lot of international agreements and

0:08:08.360 --> 0:08:12.320
<v Speaker 1>adequacy decisions. So with the United Kingdom, for example, we

0:08:12.480 --> 0:08:15.760
<v Speaker 1>have a set of adequacy decisions which means that we

0:08:15.840 --> 0:08:19.880
<v Speaker 1>recognize the standard set in each other's systems and that

0:08:19.880 --> 0:08:23.440
<v Speaker 1>allows for data flows, and that set of data flows

0:08:23.440 --> 0:08:26.440
<v Speaker 1>then underpinned trade, supports a lot of very good work

0:08:26.440 --> 0:08:29.160
<v Speaker 1>in the criminal justice area. Similarly, with the US, we

0:08:29.200 --> 0:08:32.560
<v Speaker 1>have an EU US Data Privacy framework, so if you

0:08:32.600 --> 0:08:36.439
<v Speaker 1>pull one thread, it can have wide ranging consequences. That's

0:08:36.480 --> 0:08:39.160
<v Speaker 1>why we need to be careful. But there may well

0:08:39.200 --> 0:08:43.480
<v Speaker 1>be opportunities for simplification achieving the same goal but in

0:08:43.520 --> 0:08:46.200
<v Speaker 1>a way that's less burdensome. Is a repetition, for example,

0:08:46.480 --> 0:08:48.000
<v Speaker 1>that we can eliminate.

0:08:48.240 --> 0:08:50.640
<v Speaker 2>Is that agreement with the United States that you mentioned,

0:08:50.640 --> 0:08:53.480
<v Speaker 2>though MEPs have highlighted their concerns over the future of

0:08:53.520 --> 0:08:56.600
<v Speaker 2>that after President Trump's inauguration and his decision to fire

0:08:56.679 --> 0:09:01.600
<v Speaker 2>several individuals involved with overseeing transit antic data transfers. Are

0:09:01.640 --> 0:09:04.520
<v Speaker 2>you worried about this? Does the privacy shield as the

0:09:04.559 --> 0:09:07.760
<v Speaker 2>agreement is now need to be reviewed as a result.

0:09:07.960 --> 0:09:11.520
<v Speaker 1>But we have received very strong reassurances directly from the

0:09:11.600 --> 0:09:16.640
<v Speaker 1>US administration of their commitment to the EUUs Data Privacy Framework,

0:09:17.440 --> 0:09:21.160
<v Speaker 1>including from the Attorney General Pambondi. When we had the

0:09:21.280 --> 0:09:25.480
<v Speaker 1>EUUs Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting in Poland just

0:09:25.520 --> 0:09:28.640
<v Speaker 1>a few weeks back, and further back in March, I

0:09:28.679 --> 0:09:31.160
<v Speaker 1>would have met with Andrew Ferguson, the chair of the

0:09:31.160 --> 0:09:34.320
<v Speaker 1>Federal Trade Commission, had a good discussion with him as well.

0:09:34.760 --> 0:09:38.040
<v Speaker 1>In both meetings, I would have underlined the importance from

0:09:38.080 --> 0:09:42.160
<v Speaker 1>the EU side of the US protecting all of the

0:09:42.200 --> 0:09:46.600
<v Speaker 1>safeguards that underpin that EU US Data Privacy Framework, and

0:09:46.600 --> 0:09:49.800
<v Speaker 1>they receive such assurances. Of course, we continue to monitor

0:09:49.880 --> 0:09:50.440
<v Speaker 1>the situation.

0:09:50.880 --> 0:09:52.520
<v Speaker 2>Is there a review of that tale underway?

0:09:52.559 --> 0:09:54.480
<v Speaker 1>We have our own obligations as well that we have

0:09:54.520 --> 0:09:58.120
<v Speaker 1>to continue to uphold. There isn't a formal review of

0:09:58.160 --> 0:10:02.760
<v Speaker 1>that framework. It continues to operate. We monitor developments and

0:10:03.240 --> 0:10:06.440
<v Speaker 1>we are also defending in the courts within the European

0:10:06.559 --> 0:10:08.520
<v Speaker 1>Union a challenge to that agreement.

0:10:08.559 --> 0:10:11.520
<v Speaker 2>Also, just staying with that issue of data transfers as well,

0:10:11.559 --> 0:10:13.880
<v Speaker 2>the Irish Data Protection Commission recently had a fine for

0:10:13.960 --> 0:10:18.040
<v Speaker 2>tech talk about data transfers to China. Does more attention

0:10:18.120 --> 0:10:20.080
<v Speaker 2>need to be paid to the Chinese side of that

0:10:20.080 --> 0:10:22.280
<v Speaker 2>equation as well and how EU personal data is being

0:10:22.320 --> 0:10:23.280
<v Speaker 2>used in that country.

0:10:24.040 --> 0:10:29.080
<v Speaker 1>So the national data protection authorities are completely independent and

0:10:29.280 --> 0:10:33.240
<v Speaker 1>they implement the data protection law within their own country,

0:10:33.240 --> 0:10:37.640
<v Speaker 1>but increasingly they do so in a coordinated manner through

0:10:37.760 --> 0:10:42.400
<v Speaker 1>the network of data protection authorities around the EU. And

0:10:42.440 --> 0:10:45.880
<v Speaker 1>I think that their conclusion and their finding in that

0:10:46.000 --> 0:10:49.760
<v Speaker 1>case was very clear and set out exactly what the

0:10:49.800 --> 0:10:53.040
<v Speaker 1>obligations are in relation to the transfer of data.

0:10:53.160 --> 0:10:56.320
<v Speaker 2>All right, Michael McGrath, the EU's Commissioner for Democracy Justice

0:10:56.320 --> 0:10:58.160
<v Speaker 2>through a long consumer protection thank you very much for

0:10:58.240 --> 0:11:01.120
<v Speaker 2>joining us in our Brussels radio you doing this morning