Thanks for your question and the debate management Piyers. Now, concerning your question: it’s true I’m a veteran Commissioner and that the EPA has been in power many times, but look at what happened when it’s not: inactivity, no dialogue between the member states, nothing. Just an act which is useful for the European Union to act sometimes. But the broken Union hasn’t been created by the EPA or by me, because we have done many things to fix it, and some of them are working now and have been proved to be useful for every European citizen.

And now, I would like to address all the European citizens watching the debate tonight: Europeans, you are not alone, and you will never be alone again if I’m elected as Premier. When the debate started, I said Europe was playing its first survival round tonight, and now we have seen that with these 2 women, Europe will lose. The European Union needs to go back to the values we defend, to protect sovereignty, to evolve and adapt to the new times and challenges to come, to be solidary and empathic, to be a place where everybody wants to be.

It’s easy to sell promises which will make our Union worse, but I always say complex challenges need complex solutions. A Juncker Commission is hard-working, keen on helping every single citizen, no matter what they vote or what they think. Europe is a land of freedom, a land which everybody wants to protect. Together, if we’re united and we cooperate to fix our region, we will be able to enjoy a better Europe.

So, let’s bring the real European Union back, and let’s do it together. I’m Jean-Claude Juncker and I want to be the next EU Premier. Thanks and good night

Maybe some disagree with some of my proposals, but I want your option to be heard and taken seriously, I will never aim to silence you. Silencing your voices and making them not matter is what the EPA have attempted to do in the past and they show no plans of stopping those attempts, we have to stop them now and together, let our voices be heard!

Dear viewer I urge all of you to take part in these election, by showing your support and either contacting you representatives or voting directly, if you have the option to vote. The Union can turn a new page in its development and advance, or turn few pages backwards, "bring the real EU back", and see the same story play out again. An immense power lies in our hands, and if we use it, there is no force that could stop us from building a free and just Union!

JEAN-CLAUDE JUNCKER: You've described the EU as 'broken' and said you want to 'bring the real European Union back'. But you're a veteran Internal Affairs Commissioner, and your party, the EPA, have been a powerful force for much of the EU's recent history. Isn't this 'broken' EU the one that you created?

SOFIE CIKAROVA: You've spoken about the EU 'violating the sovereignty of nations', but you also belong to the Party of the European Left. How can you reconcile those two positions: would a member state be free to be right-wing in your Europe?

ISKRIS KOLINE: You started off by saying 'we no longer have a Europe', but you're trying to achieve your agenda through the existing European institutions by running for Premier Commissioner. Why not lobby for countries to leave the EU and set up a new union more in line with your vision; and if you lose this election, will you remain committed to the current EU?

On a small side note, Mr. Juncker, I wouldn't talk about this not being a manipulation contest when you yourself started with a manipulation by accusing Dr. Koline of believeing that the Union is "stupid"."

Also, I might want to remember everybody watching this is a Premier Commissioner Debate, not a manipulation contest. It is obvious the Commission doesn’t have the power to pass the laws, that will always go through the Council and so it will be under a Juncker Commission. What I’m proposing is very simple: the Commission and the member states, along with the Council Speaker, will elaborate a proposal to submit to the Council and then it will be voted there.

How would a Juncker Commission give a boundary to these competences? That’s very simple: the Commission will make a proposal on which areas should be awarded to each type of competency, and then discussed with member states. That will allow the Commission to have a better view and the Europeans to be involved.

OCC: The rally in Reitzmag is still to be published but it will speak about that

Now to your question, The purpose of European Union should be in promoting and developing co-operation among its member states, helping the member states with economic development in case they require help, such development would after all benefit all the Europeans, and in exceptional situation of the danger of conflict it should serve to mediate between the sides in order to prevent a conflict. The point of a European Union should be to help the member states and their citizens, not to strangle them.

Europe and the Union are useful is they are well-designed, and we obviously have a problem with that because we have many people willing to leave the European Union because they believe it’s stupid and no longer useful, like Dr. Koline who runs for a position of an organisation she doesn’t believe. Seems weird, right? The European Assembly has no longer any sense with the leaders summit, that should go as soon as possible; we should establish a control mechanism to the Council which is independent from the Commission and directly elected by the Europeans or any other alternative that seems feasible. There are many things to do in the European Union, I think all of us on this room and many of you in your homes will surely think the same, but we need to choose wisely and think about the Europe we really want: compare an Union which might be similar to what happens with the UNSR or another which might be a complete utopia with one we all know it’s going to work because we’ve the best team working on it.

What's the point of the European Union if all the nations do their own thing? Also, how do you pronounce Vayinaod?

I do not even know whether you know what a balance of payment crisis is, which is horrifying, especially as, per the Constitution, the primary objective of the Premier Commissioner is the maintenance of the European economy.

Ms. Čikarová, thank you for clarifying your policies, that is all I will say. However, I would like to ask, if, say, if it were known that a specific course of development that a nation wishes to take loans for leads almost always to an inability to actually pay for those loans in the end, would it be advisable to lend that money? I believe you have already answered this, but I would simply like to confirm this. In my mind, it is not, which is why I would generally be against loaning money for the purpose of ISI, unless there is extenuating evidence that such a thing would not result in disaster; but of course you may think differently.

The EU 2030 Strategy just pretends to bring the real European Union back, that one many want to destroy and it’s their worst nightmare. And by the way Ms. Koline, if you think an intervention would draft me out, then you don’t know me.

Ms. Čikarová, the same that according to you happened to me, now happened to you with your first sentence. One says you are similar, the other says you are different but still you remain to be the European left twins, and that cannot be denied by anybody on this room.

By the way Ms. Čikarová, we can all make mistakes on any name, as far as we don’t make things worse. The way Dr. Koline focuses on economy is outrageous, trying to spend even more money despite the major though of the EU is else cutting or keeping the budget the same! How can we allow that when the EU is on risk because of things like that? And finally, Ms. Čikarová: any diplomatic problems which risks the European Union’s stability concerns and involves the Commission if it keeps on going, and that’s a Commission service basic lesson.

Mr. Juncker you were almost right and yet you ended up being completely wrong. If you payed any attention to our campaigns you must have noticed that I said that some of Dr. Koline's policies are similar to mine, which she denied yet you claim that we both pretend that they are different. Mr. Juncker, you don't remember the names of important actors in Europe, you either do not pay attention to others or lie about them, I am not sure which is worse and not to mention that you think it's wrong to focus on economy, as you accused Dr. Koline for focusing on economy as if it was something bad, while focusing on issues that do not involve the Commission like the Copala City. Are those the qualities of a good Premier Commissioner in your eyes?

The issue with the scholarship and the touristic programs is that they are not a solution, nor anything approaching a solution. They are bandages to an issue that requires a much greater intervention - an intervention you doggedly resist, because it would mean the end of people like you.

A terrible scholarship would be awarding lazy students with a trip to Europe to do nothing related with their studies; half-baked touristic programs would be not helping the Europeans to travel around our region. But it’s with deep sorrow that you remember me to many that questioned the Eurorail project and now it’s a transport reference for 6 countries. It has been proved that when I do something, it works. That’s why the Europeans are always aware of what voting for me means.

Does a terrible scholarship and half-baked "touristic programs" compare to stability for European creditors? To the protection of the ozone layer, of the atmosphere in general? No, it does not, certainly not.

I’ve been the only candidate not to stick to a single topic, and while the other candidates keep attacking, I will keep proposing things. And about European leaders, I really want to hear them, that’s why I will host a Leaders’ Summit as soon as agendas are available to discuss the State of the Union.

But of course, you and Ms. Čikarová are like twins: you both pretend to say that you’re very different, but you’re mostly the same: both of you want to see a side being benefitted by the EU while the other side is forgotten.

Ms. Čikarová, I think it’s impossible to let the UNSR join when the condemnation says: “The European Union shall only recognize the democratically elected government of the United Dominions of Icholasen under Queen Anastasia II and Prime Minister Eilidh Whiteford as the legitimate government of Icholasen.” Besides, if the referendum was made, we’d have a different situation: a democratic choice which means the Condemnation could be repealed.

Also, it’s funny you suggest the referendum could be manipulated, and I think that’s not productive for the Europeans, nor realistic. So Ms. Čikarová, why don’t we do good proposals for the Europeans? Are you interested on proposing something? I can guarantee my full compromise to attempt the end of all conflicts around the EU with diplomacy and neutrality. You might have the first one in this topic, but not the second, and that doesn’t let you to be a good Premier.