Dr. Janez Potočnik: Brez družbeno sprejemljivih socialnih pogojev se zeleni prehod ne bo zgodil

Gost nove epizode vladnega podkasta GOVSI je dr. Janez Potočnik: med pripravami na vstop Slovenije v EU vodja ožje pogajalske skupine za vstop v EU, nato dva mandata evropski komisar, danes pa član in sopredsedujoči Mednarodnemu panelu za vire pri OZN. Pogovor je vodila direktorica Urada Vlade Republike Slovenije za komuniciranje Petra Bezjak Cirman. 

Letos obeležujemo 20 let od vstopa Slovenije v Evropsko unijo. Da smo se lahko včlanili, je bilo treba imeti jasen cilj in vložiti ogromno naporov v spremembe pravnega, gospodarskega in še kakšnega sistema, da smo bili kot država in družba pripravljeni na članstvo v EU. Zakaj smo bili tako uspešni v procesu pogajanj? Kakšna je vloga EU v svetu danes? Kakšna je vloga Slovenije v EU? Se dobro soočata s številnimi globalnimi izzivi, še posebej s prehodom na bolj trajnostni način življenja? Kako izpeljati tako imenovani zeleni prehod, da bo pravičen za vse? Dr. Janez Potočnik že desetletja sooblikuje javne politike v slovenskem in zadnja leta predvsem v mednarodnem prostoru. Je strateg z vizijo in izjemno zanimiv sogovornik.

Vabljeni tudi k ogledu videopodkasta.


[ENGLISH VERSION] 
Dr Janez Potočnik: Without socially acceptable social conditions, the green transition will not happen

The guest of the 2nd episode of the GOVSI government podcast is Dr Janez Potočnik: during the preparations for Slovenia's accession to the EU, he was the head of the EU Accession Negotiating Group, then European Commissioner for two terms, and today he is a member and co-chair of the UN's International Panel on Resources. The discussion was moderated by Petra Bezjak Cirman, Director of the Government Communications Office. 

This year marks the 20th anniversary of Slovenia's accession to the European Union. In order to join, it was necessary to have a clear goal and to put a lot of effort into changing the legal, economic and other systems so that we as a country and a society were ready for EU membership. Why have we been so successful in the negotiation process? What is the EU's role in the world today? What is Slovenia's role in the EU? Are we coping well with the many global challenges, especially the transition to a more sustainable way of life? How can we make the so-called green transition fair for all? Dr Janez Potočnik has been shaping public policies in Slovenia for decades and, in recent years, especially internationally. He is a strategist with a vision and an extremely interesting interlocutor.

You are also invited to watch the video podcast. 

Transcript

Podkast GOVSI

Direktorica Ukom Petra Bezjak Cirman (voditeljica): Dober dan, spoštovane poslušalke, poslušalci, gledalke in gledalci. Pozdravljeni v drugi epizodi vladnega podkasta GOVSI v produkciji Urada vlade za komuniciranje. Z vami sem Petra Bezjak Cirman in z mano je moj gost dr. Janez Potočnik. Dober dan. 

dr. Janez Potočnik: Dober dan, Petra. 

Voditeljica: Letos praznujemo 20 let članstva Slovenije v Evropski uniji, zato se bomo v tej epizodi spomnili, kako smo se priključili Evropski uniji, kakšna je danes naša vloga v tej politični zvezi in kakšna je njena prihodnost. Gospod Potočnik, začenjava 20 let nazaj, ko ste bili glavni pogajalec za vstop Slovenije v Evropsko unijo. 

dr. Potočnik: Vodja ožje pogajalske skupine. 

Voditeljica: Torej, vodja ožje pogajalske skupine. Kaj to sploh pomeni? Kakšni so vaši spomini na tisti čas? 

dr. Potočnik: Ja, to so bili lepi časi. To je bil tudi eden od trenutkov, ko je bila Slovenija zelo poenotena. Ta ožja pogajalska skupina je štela običajno tam nekje 12, 13 ljudi, vsi smo bili iz stroke, skratka, ni bila to politično izbrana skupina. Kar je bilo zelo pomembno, ker smo na tak način lahko v slovenskem prostoru ohranjali tudi pred politiko tak videz - in tudi ne samo videz - lahko smo na tak način delovali. Slovenija je vstopila v to t. i. luksemburško skupino šestih držav na začetku bolj skozi šivankino uho, ker nas je bremenila ta zgodba, da smo bili pač del bivše Jugoslavije in vsega, kar se je tam dogajalo pred kratkim. Na začetku smo bili nekako videni, kot da nismo najbolje pripravljeni, ampak skozi sam pogajalski proces, pa ne samo zaradi ožje pogajalske skupine, ampak zaradi cele skupine ljudi po ministrstvih, tudi zaradi Službe vlade za evropske zadeve, ministra Bavčarja, takrat je bil izjemno učinkovit, so se te zadeve premikale hitro naprej, dobro, usklajeno. In počasi smo bili tudi na tem evropskem parketu vedno bolj videni kot nekdo, ki se dobro zaveda, kaj pomeni vstop, kaj je treba narediti, ki je dobro pripravljen in ki ima pravzaprav tudi že samo izhodišče relativno dobro. 

Voditeljica: Pa bi kaj spremenili? Danes se zdi, ko gledava za nazaj, da je iz balkanskih držav Slovenija tista, ki je šla prva v Evropsko unijo, velik uspeh. Bi vi kaj spremenili takrat? 

dr. Potočnik: Mislim, z leti seveda postajamo modrejši, ampak ko gledam ta proces, kako smo ga takrat vodili, se mi zdi, da je bil kar zelo optimalno voden. Imeli smo eno zelo zanimiv pristop, ki se je izkazal kot učinkovit. To je, da smo naš pristop, raven priprav, vsega, kar počnemo, smo sistematično predstavljali po prestolnicah Evropske unije. Vedno, ko smo šli denimo v Helsinke, smo povabili vse predstavnike diplomatskih služb, tudi iz drugih držav, ki so potem v te njihove države poročali, da smo dobro pripravljeni in take kroge smo opravili skozi vse prestolnice Evropske unije. To sporočilo se je preprosto multipliciralo. 

Voditeljica: Verjetno si dane, ne vem, ko bodo recimo letos prvič volili Slovenci, ki so že bili rojeni v Evropski uniji, sploh ne znamo predstavljati, kaj vse ste dali čez. 

dr. Potočnik: Ja, pa …. Saj takrat stvari izgledajo zahtevne, veliko dela je bilo, veliko. Mi smo opravili dokaj tehnokratski posel. Ta pogajanja, o katerih se velikokrat govori, so večkrat doma kot pa dejansko z Evropsko unijo. Ker ti moraš doma ljudi prepričati bodisi v gospodarstvu bodisi tudi ostale, zakaj je to smiselno. 

Voditeljica: Kaj je bilo takrat pomembno, da so bili politiki tako enotni pri tem cilju? 

dr. Potočnik: Seveda, seveda, to je bilo izjemno pomembno in takrat smo dejansko bili enotni pri tem cilju in smo delali z roko v roki. Mi smo bili edini, tudi v Evropi, ki smo sprejemali naša pogajalska izhodišča, v slovenskem parlamentu. Drugi tega niso sprejemali v parlamentih. Ampak nikoli nismo imeli nikakršnih problemov. Nasprotno, izkazalo se je, da smo pravzaprav ustvarili bistveno večjo pripadnost. Ljudje so se počutili kot del te zgodbe, ne pa izločeni iz te zgodbe. Vedno, v vseh tovrstnih procesih je izjemno pomembno, da ti že od začetka nekako vključujoče deluješ. Ker kasneje vključevati, ko so enkrat stvari že odločene, se ljudje ne počutijo več enako in tudi nimajo te pripadnosti, kot jo imajo, če so del procesa. 

Voditeljica: Danes je ta vrlina pogosto pozabljena. 

dr. Potočnik: Lahko da, ampak takrat je točno to bil način dela in dejansko, dejansko je bil to del tega uspeha, o katerem danes lahko mirne duše govorimo. 

Voditeljica: Če preletiva vaš življenjepis, ki je obsežen, samo nekaj ključnih mejnikov sem izbrala iz vašega življenja: bili ste minister v slovenski vladi, večkratni evropski komisar, imate tri častne doktorate evropskih univerz, po zaključku komisarskih mandatov pred desetletjem ste bili imenovani za člana in sopredsedujočega Mednarodnemu panelu za vire, v katerem sodelujete še danes. 

dr. Potočnik: Da. 

Voditeljica: Marsikoga zanima, kaj sploh danes počnete. 

dr. Potočnik: Ja, ta mednarodni panel za vire je velika zgodba. V bistvu imate v okviru Združenih narodov tri velike znanstveno politične povezave. Ena je tista, ki jo praktično ljudje najbolj poznajo, to je t. i. IPCC International Panel for Climate Change, ta se ukvarja s podnebnimi spremembami. Potem imate IPBS, ki se ukvarja z biotsko raznovrstnostjo, izginjanjem. In potem je naš panel - Panel International Resource Panel se imenujemo. To smo vse UN paneli. Naš panel se ukvarja z vsemi naravnimi viri, s tem, kako jih upravljamo in kako so pravzaprav povezani z gospodarstvom in gospodarsko zgodbo. Skratka, medtem ko se prva dva panela bolj ukvarjata s posledicami, se mi bolj ukvarjamo z vzroki in kaj je treba spremeniti, da do teh posledic ne bi prišlo. 

Voditeljica: In kaj ugotavljate? Vi ste doktor ekonomije. Včasih je veljalo: kapitalizem, delajmo dobiček, dobiček, dobiček, to je vse, kar šteje. Pozabimo na naravne vire, na plače delavcev. Pomembno je, da je na koncu ustvarjen dobiček. Kaj je danes tisto, kar dela dobro podjetje? 

dr. Potočnik: Ja, dobro podjetje … Mislim, še vedno se večinoma podjetje meri po tem, kako dobro posluje in tudi prav je, da vsako podjetje dobro posluje. Ampak dejansko vidim bolj problem pri tem, kakšni so tržni signali, ki jih pošiljamo proizvajalcem in potrošnikom, kako pravzaprav vrednotimo naravne vire. Ker velikokrat praktično nimajo cene. Saj imajo naravni viri na nek način sami po sebi vrednost, ampak takoj, ko jih postaviš v kontekst tržnega gospodarstva, pa vsaka stvar, ki je ne vrednotiš, je seveda ne rabiš odgovorno in jo rabiš pretirano. In to se nam dogaja tudi pri rabi različnih naravnih virov - od vode, zemlje, materialov, kovin, vsega, kar rabimo; konec koncev tudi energije. In če tega ne vrednotiš pravilno, je pravzaprav signal, ki ga daješ proizvajalcem ta: ne skrbite za vire, ker ni vaša odgovornost, ali bodo ohranjeni za naslednjo generacijo. Vaša odgovornost je, da ustvarjate pač dobre poslovne rezultate v tem trenutku, zdaj in za vas. Potrošnikom pa pravzaprav dajete sporočilo…  Recimo, velikokrat pri tem zelenem prehodu je tako, da so vse stvari, ki so povezane z zelenim prehodom na nek način dražje. Ali pa zdrava hrana je običajno dražja … Ali pa okolju prijazno pridelana hrana je dražja… Ali pa električni avtomobil je dražji od avtomobila z motorjem z notranjim izgorevanjem … In to je v bistvu ravno napačen signal, a ne? Ker potrošniki smo … Nas so v šoli učili, da pač moramo… Da so cenovni signali ključni tržni signali, in zdaj - če mi dobivamo take signale, potem je trkati na zavest ljudi nekoliko, pravzaprav je nekako hinavsko, ni ravno skladno s tem, kar jim preko trga govorimo. Ker preko trga jim govorimo - obnašajte se drugače. 

Voditeljica: Ampak - kako se bo recimo nek povprečen Evropejec, reciva Slovenec s povprečno slovensko plačo lahko privadil na to realno. Zdaj ste sami omenili - dizelskih avtomobilov v Evropi ne bo več, bodo električni avtomobili, ki so dražji, plače pa vemo, kakšne so. Kakšna je sploh možnost? 

dr. Potočnik: To, kar ste omenili, je pravzaprav ključna stvar, ki jo jaz stalno poskušam poudarjati na vseh teh mednarodnih kontaktih, povsod. Če ni družbeno sprejemljivih socialnih pogojev za prehod v zeleno družbo, se to ne bo zgodilo. 

Voditeljica: Kaj bi to bilo? Subvencije? 

dr. Potočnik: Ne, ne, subvencije. Enostavno je … Tudi pri delitvi bo treba … Danes enostavno živi preveč ljudi na meji? Recimo, zdaj se veliko govori o tudi umetni inteligenci in morda se spomnite stavka, ki ga je pred kratkim dejal Elon Musk, ne, ki je rekel: ko bo umetna inteligenca polno uvedena, delovnih mest za ljudi ne bo več, ne bomo jih več rabili. Kar pomeni, da boš dejansko moral iti v smer univerzalnega temeljnega dohodka, ker v nasprotnem primeru ve se, kaj se nam bo zgodilo in kaj se nam bo dogajalo v vseh družbah. Bi pač imeli ljudi na cestah …

Voditeljica: Bi lahko bili mi prvi? Slovenci z univerzalnim temeljnim dohodkom. 

dr. Potočnik: Veliko se je v teh časih govorilo, lahko, mislim, prav je, da se že danes razmišlja o tem, ker dejansko se vsa družba giblje proti temu. Ampak če želiva o tem govoriti v kontekstu zelenega prehoda, mislim, da je zelo pomembno, da ne govorimo … Mislim, seveda je ustvarjanje ključen del. Ker če ne ustvariš, ne moreš deliti. Ampak je pa danes ekonomski sistem tak - in to dokazujejo vsi matematični modeli - da bogatejši postanejo še bogatejši, revni pa relativno bolj revni. To ne pomeni, da nimajo več ne absolutno, ampak relativno gledano pa so bolj revni. In zaradi tega lahko samo s prerazporeditvijo, trdijo ti ljudje, ki se strokovno ukvarjajo s tem, v današnjem ekonomskem sistemu odgovoriš na te izzive. Moja poanta je, da se morajo danes vse vlade, če želimo zeleni prehod dejansko izvesti, ukvarjati ne samo s tem, kako bomo ustvarjali, ampak tudi s pravičnejšo delitvijo, ki je izjemno pomembna, in ustvariti pogoje. Okolje in sociala sta vedno del, sta dva različna dela istega kovanca in, preprosto, stvari, ki so nesprejemljive, jih v praksi ne moreš uvesti. To vsak, ki se je kadarkoli ukvarjal z ministrovanjem, vladanjem ali čimer koli podobnim dobro ve. Zaradi tega je ustvarjanje teh pogojev bistveno. 

Voditeljica: Je Slovenija tukaj na pravi poti? Pri zelenem prehodu, gremo v pravo smer? Ali so uresničljivi ti cilji, ki so bili v bistvu prejšnji teden še v Evropski komisiji sprejeti, od znižanja različnih stvari, ki zadevajo podnebje, na COP27, prav tako. Ali je Slovenija na to pripravljena? 

dr. Potočnik: Mislim, ali je Slovenija pripravljena ali ne, jaz težko odgovorim, zaradi tega, ker ne poznam stvari toliko natančno. Vem pa, da pravzaprav 90 odstotkov, kolikor je pač cilj za 2040, je zelo ambiciozno zastavljen cilj. Vendar - cilji so vedno uresničljivi; če je volja, je tudi pot. Mislim, da je eden takih temeljnih naukov, ki se jih lahko naučimo iz obdobja pandemije covid, je par takih ključnih sporočil, ki se mi zdi, da so za ljudi zelo pomembna, da nekako ostanejo z nami. Če nekaj vidimo kot resno, potem dejansko tudi resno reagiramo. To je prvič. Drugič, vlade praviloma reagirajo premalo in prepočasi in šele, ko je vse ostalo, ko je to neizogibno. Tretjič, finančni in inovacijski potencial se lahko aktivira zelo hitro in tudi obstaja. Ste videli tudi v tem primeru, kako hitro se je aktiviral in koliko finančnih sredstev je bilo angažiranih. Četrtič - ali so sistemske spremembe možne? Ker veliko jih pravi, sistemske spremembe so prezahtevne. Itn. Vprašajte se, ali bi leta 2019, ko se je covid začel, če bi kdo brez covida poskušal uvesti delo od doma? Nikoli. Danes je delo od doma nekaj sprejemljivega in popolnoma normalnega. Potem se vprašajte, ko govoriva o človekovih potrebah, koliko oblačil ste dejansko potrebovali v času covida v primerjavi s časom pred covidom?

Voditeljica: Ampak to je bilo delo na domu. 

dr. Potočnik: Ja, vem, da je bilo, delo na domu, ampak to je dejanska človekova potreba. Ampak potem se vprašajte še bolj zanimivo vprašanje - ali ste bili za to bolj ali manj srečni? Ker to vprašanje je bistveno. Kar pa je ena taka slaba lekcija v kontekstu tega covida, in to je zadnja, pa je, da podnebnih sprememb še ne jemljemo resno. 

Voditeljica: Ja, bom tu zdaj ostala pri Sloveniji in podnebnih spremembah. Mi imamo kar nekaj izzivov, recimo PM10 delci. Tega je pri nas zelo veliko. Potem imamo kakšna onesnažena območja še iz preteklih gospodarskih bremen, to tudi dobro poznate? Pa seveda, mi smo gradili avtocestni križ in zdaj vsi vozimo avtomobile. Se vam zdi, da smo na pravi poti, da bi dosegli te podnebne cilje, glede na naš način življenja? 

dr. Potočnik: No, mislim, precej stvari ste omenili, ki so bile pač sprejete v preteklosti, pa verjetno vse niso bile optimalne. Zagotovo bi morali več pozornosti posvečati prevozu z vlakom v primerjavi s cestno infrastrukturo. Ampak za nazaj je zmeraj pravzaprav zelo preprosto biti pameten. Mislim, da je v tem trenutku zelo bistveno, da razumemo, kje so bile napake storjene. Da jih pač poskušamo odpraviti in da ne dajemo signalov, ki bi preprosto šli v napačno smer, a ne. Ko se je debatiralo o tem, da bi… Danes imamo problem v Ljubljani in se je začela diskusija takoj, da bi razširili obvoznico še za naslednji pas, in seveda štajersko avtocesto. In jaz sem takoj rekel, da je to napačen signal. Morali bi dati pravzaprav drugačen signal in reči - čez 15 let, razen za tiste, ki živijo v Ljubljani, raba znotraj tega za privatne avtomobile ne bo več dovoljena. In bi videli, kako hitro bi infrastruktura začela rasti, kako se bodo ljudje … Skratka, vi morate dajati jasne, predvidljive, dolgoročne signale. Brez teh ste potem ujetnik kratkoročnega časa in kratkoročnih interesov, ki so pa velikokrat malo drugačni, kot so pa dejansko dolgoročni interesi. In potem se ujamete v nekaj in iz tistega zatečenega težko spreminjate v neko drugačno stanje. To se pogosto dogaja predvsem zato, ker so politike, pa ne govorim tu o Sloveniji, govorim na splošno, ker so politike velikokrat resorsko ozko vodene in niso gledani rezultati horizontalno. Nasploh, če uvedete nek ukrep, denimo ukrep, ki ste ga uvedli pri energetiki, vpliva na energetiko, ampak ima vpliv tudi na vse ostale sfere družbe. Enostavno morate gledati stvari na tak način, ker v nasprotnem primeru lahko hitro pridete iz enega zatečenega stanja v neko drugo zatečeno stanje, ki ga morate pa potem čez deset let reševati. 

Voditeljica: Letos imamo evropske volitve in kot sem že prej omenila, bodo šli na njih Slovenke in Slovenci, ki so se rodili v Evropski uniji in sploh ne poznajo življenja pred Evropsko unijo. Je pa znano, da je volilna abstinenca pri mladih velika. Zakaj menite naj se udeležijo teh volitev? 

dr. Potočnik: Zakaj? Zaradi tega, ker je pametno se udeležiti vseh volitev, ne samo teh. No, v vsakem primeru … Mi smo del Evrope - geografsko, zgodovinsko, ekonomsko, kakor koli gledate. Tudi zaradi tega recimo pri nas procesi pogajanj, pa celo veselje po vstopu ni bilo tako prešerno kot v nekaterih drugih državah, ker smo to jemali kot dokaj normalen del našega dozorevanja in našega življenja. Ti, ki bodo zdaj imeli prvič priložnost iti na volitve, zanje bi bilo sporočilo zelo preprosto: ne iti na volitve in se kasneje pritoževati, s čim nisi zadovoljen, je nesmisel. In predvsem ni pošteno. Mladi generaciji bi pa sporočil predvsem to: bodite v tem procesu aktivni, ker odločate o vaši usodi. Ne pustite drugim, da odločajo o vaši usodi, ker bodo prepogosto odločali o vaši usodi tako, da bodo maksimizirali svojo dobrobit zdaj in tu. 

Voditeljica: Vidimo lahko, da nekateri mladi so kar pogumni in odločajo o naših usodah. Nekje ste omenili Greto, tako je ona okoljska aktivistka, ki nas opominja, kaj se lahko zgodi z našim podnebjem. Imamo tudi zdaj 8. marec, ki se bori v Anhovem za čistejše življenje tamkajšnjih prebivalcev. Nekateri mladi so dovolj ozaveščeni … 

dr. Potočnik: Seveda so. Pogovarjala sva se o volitvah, ne o različnih skupinah. Jaz veliko delam z mladimi in veliko tudi s tovrstnimi skupinami, ker imamo nekako presek interesov. Že par let nazaj sem govoril, da bi vsaka resna vlada, predvsem sem si želel, da bi recimo evropski zeleni program imel podnaslov, ki bi mu rekli nekako pakt z bodočimi generacijami. Ker se mi zdi, da nam točno to sporočilo manjka. Da se sedanja generacija zave, da ne dela samo zase, tu in v svojem lastnem interesu, ampak da mora gledati naprej. Vsak ukrep mora imeti tudi t. i. dolgoročni proofing. Mora biti potrjen skozi to, da vidite, ali pelje v neko pravo smer. V nekaj, za kar bi doma, ko govorimo o lastnih družinah, naredili vse, da bi naši otroci bolje živeli. Ne vem, zakaj tega potem ne bi naredili še v službah. 

Voditeljica: Torej, se vam zdi, da Evropska unija še izpolnjuje svoje cilje ali ne več? 

dr. Potočnik: Glejte, Evropska unija, veste, zakaj je nastala, a ne? In ta cilj z manjšimi odstopanji bolj ali manj uspešno uresničuje že kar nekaj desetletij. Ne vemo, kaj bi bilo, če ne bi bilo. Vemo pa, kaj je, ko je ni. 

Voditeljica: Kljub temu da imamo recimo rusko agresijo v Ukrajini na robu Evrope, …

dr. Potočnik: Kljub temu da imamo rusko agresijo na robu Evrope … Ampak zavedati se moramo, da je ta prostor … Prej je bilo veliko spopadov na tem evropskem prostoru, pravzaprav smo bili velikokrat kar v centru spopadov. Bi pa opozoril še na eno dimenzijo Evropske unije, ki je pa ne vidimo dovolj. Namreč, danes živimo kot prva generacija kadar koli v družbeno-ekološkem svetu planetarnih razsežnosti. Prvi smo, skratka, povezani smo, videli smo, v pandemiji, kako smo povezani s podnebnimi spremembami, vidimo pri internetu, vidimo pri globalni trgovini … Tudi, recimo, celo druga svetovna vojna bi težko rekli, da je bila svetovna. Svetovna je postala, ko je jedrsko orožje bilo vključeno v bojevanje. Ko so bila vključena orožja, ki so imela lahko globalni učinek, a ne? Danes je teh stvari, teh izzivov globalnih veliko. Zaradi tega stvari ne morete reševati parcialno, jih ne more rešiti Slovenija. Ne more. Ampak jih lahko rešujete samo, če se odpovedujete t. i. suverenosti. Pariški sporazum je neke vrste odpoved suverenosti na področju podnebnih sprememb. In sodelujete bolj, kot ste sodelovali v preteklosti. To je edini izhod in edina rešitev, ki jo lahko najdemo v tej smeri. In Evropska unija je en tak dober model, na katerem lahko vidite marsikaj dobrega, kaj je delovalo, pa tudi kaj deluje malo manj in kje morate biti bolj pozorni in kje so napori večji. Veliko narodov, ki danes ne živijo tako kot živimo v Evropski uniji, gleda sem z neke vrste zanimanjem, kako naše izkušnje uporabiti. Ker v končni fazi bomo morali nek podoben način sodelovanja razviti, veliko bolj učinkovitega, kot ga imamo tudi na globalni ravni, ali pa nekaterih problemov preprosto ne bomo rešili. 

Voditeljica: Se Slovenija dobro znajde po vašem evropskem prostoru? Ocena od ena do pet recimo. 

Dr. Potočnik: Ni ocen od ena do pet. Slovenija je videna v Evropi verjetno bolje, kot je videna med domačimi prebivalci. 

Voditeljica: Zanimivo dejstvo, čeprav po anketi Evrobarometra kaže, da smo tudi zadovoljni …

Dr. Potočnik: Ne. Nisem tega rekel. Nisem rekel, kako mi vidimo EU. Rekel sem, kako mi vidimo sebe. In Evropska unija vidi nas verjetno bolje, kot mi sebe vidimo, in morda nas vidi celo bolje, kot v resnici smo. Ampak v Evropi smo na nek način dokaj konstruktiven partner, nekdo, s katerim ni veliko problemov kot z nekaterimi drugimi državami. Nekdo, kjer te skrajne tendence niso tako glasne ali pa politično aktivne. In zaradi tega je Slovenija videna, z vsemi problemi, danes je ni države, ki jih ne bi imela, kot nek normalen partner. Je pa seveda samo majhna država v primerjavi z nekaterimi večjimi in dejstvo je, da če si majhen, si lahko na eni strani bolj fleksibilen. Bilo bi pa nepošteno, če ne bi rekel, da se v evropskem prostoru najprej in prej prisluhne velikim državam kot pa majhnim državam. Seveda, ker imajo večji ekonomski in politični vpliv. Ampak ni nobenih razlogov za biti kakršno koli plat zvona, ko govorimo o Sloveniji in evropski zgodbi.

Voditeljica: Omenili ste države Evropske unije, ki so mogoče drugačne od nas, bolj problematične, če uporabim ta izraz. Bi bila recimo ukinitev veta rešitev za Evropsko unijo? Vemo, da te odločitve mora potrditi 27 članic.

Dr. Potočnik: Ni za vse veto, veto je za nekatere stvari. Za nekatere je večina in vprašanje povsem na mestu je, ali ponekod, kjer se še uporablja soglasje članic, ali ne bi bilo bolj smiselno preiti na večinsko odločanje. To ni preprosto vprašanje in to se dejansko v teh konvencijah se potem te stvari resno prediskutirajo. Jaz osebno mislim, da več sodelovanja na več področjih, poglobljenega, je enostavno prava stvar. Recimo, mi imamo zelo v rokah držav članic davčne sisteme. Ampak če ti ne greš bolj v poenotenje teh stvari, dokler je to stvar konkurence znotraj istega konkurenčnega prostora, potem imate problem. In vi imate še znotraj Evrope države, ki so videne deloma kot davčne oaze, ki so neki escape room za bogate ljudi in bogata podjetja. In to na nek način kar tiho sprejemamo. Je pa anomalija prve klase, tako da več tega poenotenja, ampak na koncu se morajo članice strinjati. Velikokrat vlada to prepričanje, da je ta tehnokratska evropska komisija, ampak edina moč Evropske komisije je v bistvu tam, da lahko predlaga, sprejemajo pa članice pa parlament, saj drug ne sprejema. Ampak ko enkrat sprejmeš, je pa Evropska komisija zadolžena za to, da ti izvajaš, in tam pa potem nekaterim stopi na žulj, ampak so prej to že sprejeli.

Voditeljica:Bi mogoče širitev Evropske unije kaj pripomogla?

Dr. Potočnik: Širitev Evropske unije je smiselna. Že jaz sem vedno pristaš tega, da če Evropa želi uresničiti te sanje, ki jih ima že od začetka, prostor miru, stabilnosti, blaginje, vrednot, potem je to nemogoče brez vključitve nekaterih delov, ki so zgodovinsko gledano bili tisti, kjer je prihajalo tudi do največjih trenj in se je včasih iz iskre požar, kot smo temu rekli, razširil. Tako da, recimo Balkan mora biti del Evropske unije, tudi verjetno še nekatere druge države. Tudi jaz bi se bil zelo z veseljem pripravljen pogovarjati o Turčiji in jo videti kot nek most. Skratka, govorimo o tem, koliko močna želi biti Evropska unija, koliko odmeva njen glas. Kakšno vlogo želi igrati? Vse to so vprašanja, ampak ko govoriva o širitvi, bi rekel še drugo stvar. Zelo pomembno je pa, da v tem procesu, so države, ki se pridružijo EU, čim bolje pripravljene. Ker lahko smo se naučili že v tej naši dvajsetletni širitvi oziroma posledicah dvoje. Eno je, da spremembe se dejansko dogajajo in imate moč, da spreminjate države v pristopnem procesu veliko bolj kot pa kasneje v času članstva, in druga, da te ... Skratka, zelo pomembno je, kako v bistvu ... Zdaj sem pozabil, ko je bila druga. Odkrito priznam, bila je pa pomembna, ampak mogoče se bom še spomnil.

Voditeljica: Da se rešijo mejna vprašanja?

Dr. Potočnik: Mejna vprašanja so del tega in če ne rešiš tega, potem nekako jih zamrznjena preneseš v EU in tam so pa vse članice enakovredne. In potem je velikokrat vprašanje, ki ste ga sami omenili, soglasja. In potem smo tam in se stvar ne premakne, tako da se mi zdi zelo pomembno, da se ti dve stvari nekako gledata v kombinaciji in da se o vlogi Evrope razmišlja na nek malo bolj strateški način, kot včasih razmišljamo. 

Voditeljica: Že prej sem omenila zadnjo raziskavo Eurobarometra. Narejena je bila lani in meri javno mnenje. Kaže, da se prebivalci Slovenije počutimo državljane EU in da smo nadpovprečno naklonjeni različnim politikam in predlogom Evropske unije. Po drugi strani pa, če se še vrneva na okoljske težave, vidimo proteste kmetov. Tudi v Sloveniji so bili zaradi Nature 2000 in kmetovanja, potem vidimo francoske kmete, skratka protest kmetov traja že kar nekaj tednov. Zakaj takšen razkorak? Ali kljub temu je Evropa še vedno odtujena, Evropska unija, od njenih prebivalcev ali ne? Čemu pripisujete ta razkorak? 

Dr. Potočnik: Evropska unija odtujena prebivalcem? Jaz bi predvsem prebivalce pozval, naj se približajo Evropski uniji, ker se bo težko Evropska unija približala prebivalcem. Ampak o vseh teh stvareh, ko ste govorili, mislim, da je lepo videti, da v Sloveniji prevladuje tak odnos do Evropske unije, kar je tudi prav. To, da prihaja do določenih protestov, to bo vedno prihajalo in je tudi prav. Mimogrede, ko govoriva ravno o kmetih, jaz mislim, da imajo v marsičem prav. Ampak včasih je na nek način vse skupaj izpeljano tako, kot da gre za konflikt med okoljevarstveniki in kmeti. Ampak kmeti in okoljevarstveniki imajo v veliki večini popolnoma iste interese. Kdo pa nima interesa ohranjati biotske raznovrstnosti opraševalcev? Kdo nima interesa ohranjati kvalitetne zemlje, ki bo bolje rodila? Kdo nima tega interesa? In vendar, kmetje bi morali za dostojno življenje v prvi vrsti dobiti s priznanjem in preko trga. In tudi v tej prehranski verigi bi moral njihov delež se povečati v primerjavi z deležem ostalih deležnikov, ki so v prehranski verigi, nimajo pa veliko pogajalske moči v tej prehranski verigi. In to so osnovna vprašanja. In potem se te stvari na koncu mogoče, na vprašanje, ki ste rekli, da vam še povem, kaj mislim o Naturi 2000. Hvala bogu, da se je Slovenija odločila ... Ne vem, kako je sicer prišla do tistih skoraj 38 % in smo država z največjim deležem Nature 2000. Ampak verjemite mi, na dolgi rok je to največje bogastvo, ki smo ga lahko kakorkoli zavarovali za zanamce. Ja, nam kratkoročno povzroča tu in tam kakšen problem, ampak Natura 2000 nikoli ni bila mišljena kot popolnoma zavarovano področje pred človekom. Bila je mišljena kot odgovorno sobivanje človeka z naravo. To je bila mišljena vedno. Tisto, kar imajo kmetje tu povsem prav, je pa, da če nekdo razglasi del tvojega ozemlja za zaščiteno ozemlje, v tem primeru, skratka, če je javni interes, mora biti tudi javni denar, s katerim ti kompenzirajo to dejstvo. In to velikokrat v Sloveniji, to sem jaz videl že tudi na drugih področjih, recimo pri kulturni dediščini. Ne moreš imeti, recimo, jaz prihajam iz Krope. Ne moreš imeti cele vasi kulturno zaščitene, ko je potreba po javnem denarju, ker konec koncev je to v javnem interesu, da je zaščitena, tega pa ni ali pa ga je težko dobiti. Skratka, javni interes mora biti spremljan z javnim financiranjem. Raje manj zaščititi, ampak tisto dejansko potem ščititi. In pri Naturi 2000 pa imamo skupno kmetijsko politiko. Imamo proračun, ki je velik v Evropski uniji. Ampak če bi kmetje dobili nadomestila dovolj preko trga, potem bi se dejansko ta denar namesto za nadomestilo njihovega dohodka lahko uporabljal za to, da se jim pomaga preusmeriti na dolgoročno bolj trajnostno kmetovanje. Nekaj, kar je spet v javnem interesu.

Voditeljica: Ampak je dražje, sva ugotovila. 

Dr. Potočnik: Že, da je dražje. Ampak mogoče vi niste zainteresirani, da bi jedli bolj zdravo hrano? Ste verjetno.

Voditeljica: Zelo. 

Dr. Potočnik: Torej, zakaj ne? Ampak moj namen je samo ta, želim povedati, da javni denar ne more v prvi vrsti pokrivati nekih privatnih interesov. Javni denar mora skrbeti za javni interes. Mi se lahko pogovarjamo, kako širok je ta javni interes. Tudi vzdrževanje podeželja je javni interes, pa nima to direktne povezave s kmetovanjem. Absolutno bi moralo biti to nekaj, kar podpiraš. Ampak v vsakem primeru, danes denar, ki ga imamo, bi moral biti v veliko večji meri usmerjen za podporo spremembam. Tisto, kar je pa osnovna dejavnost, bi pa moralo biti preko trga, da bi ljudje, v tem primeru kmetje, dostojno živeli. Konec koncev prihajam s kmetije in točno vem, kaj je delo na kmetiji. In če sem karkoli zares sovražil v svoji mladosti, je bilo to ...

Voditeljica: Pobiranje krompirja?

Dr. Potočnik: Ne, ne. Jaz sem bil v športu. Jaz sem bil v bistvu zasvojen s športom. In ko je bil, ko je bilo lepo vreme, smo bili na polju in pospravljali seno, ko je bilo slabo vreme, smo bili pa prosti.

Voditeljica:To se pa ne izide.

Dr. Potočnik:To se ni dobro izšlo in ta spomin je ostal. Ampak spoštovanje do dela na kmetiji pa vedno.

Voditeljica: Če smo ugotovili, da imamo pozitiven trend pri tem, da se počutimo Evropejce, smo pa manj naklonjeni predlogu skupne evropske politike o priseljevanju. Govorimo tudi o podnebnih beguncih, ki prihajajo. Govorimo o tem, da prihajajo ljudje v Evropo iz območij, kjer so vojne. PV Robert Golob je na srečanju mediteranskih predsednikov vlad predlagal, da bi se v Afriki naredili izobraževalni centri, kjer bi se lahko Afričani priučili našega jezika, evropskega kateregakoli pač, in se naučili za življenje pri nas. In s tem bi zaustavili nezakonite migracije in največje pokopališče v Sredozemskem morju in hkrati dobili potrebno delovno silo. Se vam zdi to rešitev za Afriko, glede na to, da ste pogosto tudi v Afriki? 

Dr. Potočnik: Jaz bi šel še korak dlje. Mislim, mi moramo na nek način v zgodovinskem kontekstu pogledati odnos med Afriko in Evropo. In vemo, da so bile številne evropske države kolonizatorke, bom raje rekel kolonizatorke naravnih virov kot ljudi. Kolonizatorstvo ljudi je bilo posledica, ampak naravnih virov. Ker vedno v zgodovini je bil dostop do naravnih virov bodisi da je bilo to zlato, nafta, kakršnekoli druge stvari, s katerimi je lahko tvoj narod z uvozom tega ali pa s poceni delovno silo potem obogatel. In tega je bilo v zgodovini veliko. In pravzaprav, če pogledate, kdaj so se te države osamosvojile, so kar letnice običajno 1900 in več, skratka ni toliko nazaj. To želim reči. In danes ljudje iz teh držav tudi velikokrat, predvsem ker imajo slabše pogoje za življenje doma ali pa bog ne daj, da so tam še kakšni konflikti, spopadi, vojne, seveda pritiskajo na Evropo, ker smo blizu in zaradi tega, ker je preko Sredozemskega morja in predvsem Italije ta dostop zelo hiter, tako da ta pritisk na migracije je nekaj, kar ni za pričakovati, da se bo umirilo. Zame bi bila prva in najbolj bistvena politika, če parafraziram bivšega predsednika Združenih držav, ki je rekel America First, bi bila za Evropo Africa first, skratka Afrika najprej. Skratka, mi enostavno moramo sistematično začeti delati in to je tudi, mislim, da Italija, v svojih zadnjih sklepih predlagala. Sistematično delati na tem, kako v bistvu postaviti čim bolj Afriko na svoje noge. Kako zagotoviti pogoje, da bi bili pritiski manjši, hkrati pa potem, ko do teh pride, pa s podobnimi ukrepi ali pa z ukrepi, ki bi ublažili tovrstne stvari, potem tudi ravnati. Ampak mislim, da je bistveno izobraževanje žensk, predvsem deklet, da so bistvene investicije v infrastrukturo. Veliko je prisotna Kitajska pri teh investicijah v infrastrukturo danes v Afriki, ker je to nek mehki način tovrstne kolonizacije, da vstopiš in na ta način zgradiš most do tega, da imaš dostop do naravnih virov. In danes države, ki strateško razmišljajo, v bistvu vse razmišljajo skozi naravne vire, dostop do tega in kje in na kakšen način bodo lahko vzpostavile te mostove.

Voditeljica: Jaz vidim Afriko povsem drugače, kot v bistvu kontinent, ki je odlagališče za razviti svet.

Dr. Potočnik: Ja. To je del moralnega dolga, ki ga imamo. Mislim, da zavedanje, da to ni prav, se zanesljivo krepi, predvsem se pa tudi zelo jasno krepi glas afriških držav, da to ni tako in da to ne sme biti tako in da tako ni prav. In tudi recimo v teh zdaj novih naporih, ki jih imate, ki so povezani s tem prehodom v obnovljive vire energije, kjer so dejanske potrebe po t.i. kritičnih materialih zelo velike in so zelo velike tako na strani proizvodnje nove energetske infrastrukture, kot so velike tudi pri rabi električne energije, denimo električni avto rabi nekajkrat več teh kritičnih surovin, kot jih potrebuje konvencionalni avto z notranjim izgorevanjem. In v teh kontekstih se danes pojavljajo točno ta razmišljanja. Moj razmislek tule spet gre korak dlje. Ne razmišljati o tem, kje bomo diverzificirali in kje bomo dobili, ampak morda zdaj na koncu ne rabimo avtomobila. Mi rabimo mobilnost. Dajmo razmisliti na ta način, kako v bistvu uveljavimo sistem mobilnosti. Investiramo v tak sistem, ki bo v končni fazi pripeljal do tega, da bomo potrebovali manj avtomobilov na družino, da bomo razbremenili s privatnimi avtomobili, da bomo pa hkrati z alternativami ljudem poskrbeli, da bodo imeli tovrstne izbire, ki jih danes nimajo. In veliko ljudi danes, predvsem mladine, je zelo zavednih in to počnejo tudi zaradi tega, ker nimajo velikokrat alternative, druge izbire. Ampak prav je, da se točno v to smer razmišlja. Vi ne rabite stola, vi imate potrebo po sedenju. Recimo ena taka stvar, ki smo jo že videli v zgodovini. Mi nimamo potrebe po CD-jih, po kasetah, imamo potrebo po poslušanju glasbe in danes je to že v bistvu dematerializirano. Vi nimate ...

Voditeljica:Veste, zakaj se smejim? Ker si predstavljam Slovence, kako se odpovedujejo avtomobilom.

Dr. Potočnik: Saj se ne odpovedujemo.

Voditeljica: Statusni simbol.

Dr. Potočnik: To je bil statusni simbol moje generacije. Za mladino to ni več statusni simbol. Če boste pa vi, če bomo pa mi kot naša generacija želeli uveljaviti svoje statusne simbole na mlajši generaciji, bog nam pomagaj, zaradi tega, ker bomo v nekem svetu, ki smo ga naredili napačnega. Mi imamo danes ekonomski sistem, ki je potraten in nepravičen in to vsi vemo. In če ne bomo šli v spremembo tega, potem tudi nehajmo sanjati o tem, da se bomo ukvarjali s podnebnimi spremembami in ostalimi stvarmi. Predvsem pa nehajmo govoriti na glas o mladi generaciji, ker ne skrbimo zanjo, ker jo dejansko postavljamo pred zaprta vrata in probleme.

Voditeljica: Za konec bi se navezala na to, kar ste zdaj povedali. Me zanima, kako boste vi opisali v petih besedah? Jaz sem govorila z vašimi preteklimi sodelavci in boste videli, kako so vas videli. In na ta del, ki ste zdaj govorili, se bo zelo navezalo. Ampak najprej vi, vaša ocena, kdo ste vi v petih besedah?

Dr. Potočnik: Najprej bom rekel en stavek. Jaz nikoli nisem bil naklonjen temu, da ljudje sami sebe ocenjujemo, zaradi tega, ker se vsak po navadi vidi boljše, kot pa v resnici je. Pa tudi ni prav. Konec koncev te stvari ... Nikoli nisem bil pristaš tega, da recimo, zdaj pa greš po mandatu gor pred mikrofon in poveš, kako sem bil dober. Pa našteješ vse, kaj je dobro.

Voditeljica: Pa veste, da menedžerje ocenjujemo ...

Dr. Potočnik: Vem, ampak to je drugo.

Voditeljica: … da smo odgovorni do sodelavcev, pa dajemo ocene za vodilne tudi …

Dr. Potočnik: Ja, saj je prav, da dajete ocene tudi za vodilne, čeprav ... V vsakem primeru bi zase upal trditi, da sem delaven. Sem človek, ki si želi sodelovanja, kolektivnega delovanja. Ker sem prepričan, da drugače preprosto ne gre. Vedno sem pripravljen z vsakim diskutirati tudi o najtežjih stvareh, vendar ne na osebni ravni. Skratka, ti moraš vedno o problemih diskutirati tako, da izločiš ta emotivni, osebni, skratka ne iti v osebne spore. Ampak če se o nečem ne strinjaš, ne strinjaj se o problemu in sem se pripravljen pogovarjati, kolikor se želite, ampak nikakor ne smeš človeka, da se počuti slabo in da je užaljen zaradi česarkoli. V vseh teh pogajanjih sem se naučil, da če želiš kar koli doseči, stopi v čevlje tistega, s katerim se pogovarjaš. Poskušajte razumeti in potem poskušaj to, kar želiš doseči in kar veš, da je prav, narediti na tak način, da človeka prepričaš. Skratka, ta vključenost je ena ključnih stvari, če želiš biti v tovrstnih procesih uspešen. V nasprotnem primeru pa, če tega ne narediš, tega se kasneje ne da narediti. Ko enkrat nekaj sprejmeš v majhnem krogu, potem pa poskušaš to prodati v širši krog, je vedno problem, ker se ljudje ne počutijo, nimajo tega ownershipa. In pa še ena stvar je v življenju, ki je daleč najbolj pomembna. To je pa zaupanje. Zaupanje gradiš, gradiš, izgubiš ga pa mimogrede, tako da te stvari in ti medčloveški odnosi so zaupanje. Predvsem pa zdaj, ko sem že 65+, sem prišel do spoznanja, da je v življenju daleč najpomembnejše, za kaj boš rabil čas in s kom ga boš delil. Ker je to edina resnična dobrina, ki je ni v obilju in za katerega ne veš, koliko ga imaš.

Voditeljica: No, pa da vam povem, kako vas vidijo. Stratega, ki je zazrt v prihodnost. Bi se strinjali? 

Dr. Potočnik: Ja, poskušam misliti vnaprej, če se le da.

Voditeljica: In ste zazrti v prihodnost, kar ste nenazadnje tudi zdaj pokazali, kako bi morali živeti, da bomo pomagali planetu. Se strinjate?

Dr. Potočnik: Ja, se trudim v tej smeri. Še enkrat bom rekel, nerad pa ... Jaz rad govorim o tem, kaj so te ključne vrednote, ki mislim, da jim je treba slediti. Poskušam to delati tudi v svojem življenju, ampak saj veste, naj vrže kamen tisti, ki je brez greha.

Voditeljica: Hvala lepa za ta pogovor. 

Dr. Potočnik: Hvala tudi vam.

Voditeljica: Hvala vam, spoštovane gledalke in gledalci, poslušalke in poslušalci, da ste bili z nami v tej epizodi vladnega podkasta GOVSI. Nasvidenje.

[ENGLISH VERSION] 
Podcast host Petra Bezjak Cirman: Hello to our listeners and viewers. Welcome to the second episode of the government's podcast, GOVSI, prepared by the Office of Communication. I'm Petra Bezjak Cirman, and I'm joined by Dr. Janez Potočnik. This year marks the 20th anniversary of Slovenia's EU membership, so we'll devote this episode to a look back at our accession, our role today, and our future in the EU. Mr. Potočnik, let's go back 20 years when you were Slovenia's chief accession negotiator.

Dr Potočnik: The head of the core negotiating team.

Host: The head of the core negotiating team. What did that mean and how do you remember that time?

Dr Potočnik: I remember it fondly. It was one of those periods when Slovenia was very united. There were some 12 or 13 people in that core group. We were all experts, so it wasn't a politically nominated body. This was very important because it allowed us to maintain a certain impression in Slovenia, including among politicians. And it wasn't just an impression; we could also function that way. Slovenia entered the so-called Luxembourg Group of six countries just barely at the beginning because we were burdened by the fact that we had been a part of the former Yugoslavia and the recent events there. At the beginning, we were seen as not quite prepared, but as the negotiations continued, and not just because of the core group, but also because of people in the ministries and the European Affairs Office, as well as Minister Bavčar, who was very effective, these things began to move forward quickly and in a coordinated manner, so we slowly became seen in the EU arena as a party that knows what needs to be done, that is well-prepared, and that has a fairly good starting point.

Host: Would you have done anything differently? Looking back today, the fact that Slovenia was the first of the Balkan countries to join the EU was a huge success. Would you have changed anything?

Dr Potočnik: We tend to become wiser with age, but as I look back, it seems we handled the process in the best possible way. We had an interesting approach, which turned out to be effective, namely that we systematically presented our level of readiness and everything else in various EU capitals. When we went to Helsinki, for instance, we invited all the representatives of the diplomatic corps, including those from other countries, which then reported back home that we were well-prepared. We went on such circuits through all EU capitals, and our message simply spread.

Host: The first Slovenians to be born in the EU head to the polls this year, and they can't imagine what we went through.

Dr Potočnik: Well... Things looked difficult then. There was a lot of work. We needed... Our work was essentially technocratic. The negotiations that are brought up were more frequent in Slovenia than with the EU. We needed to convince people at home, both businesspeople and others, why this makes sense.

Host: Was it important then that the politicians were so united?

Dr Potočnik: Of course. That was vital. They really were united then, and we worked hand in hand. We were the only ones who got approval for our negotiating positions in the Slovenian parliament. That didn't happen elsewhere. But we never had any problems. Quite the opposite. It turned out that we had made people feel a part of this story. They were never excluded, and whenever we have such processes, it's vital that you're inclusive from the start because trying to get people on board when the decisions have been made, people no longer feel a part of the process.

Host: This virtue is often forgotten nowadays.

Dr Potočnik: Perhaps, but that was our modus operandi at the time, and it was a part of the success that we can reflect on today.

Host: If we look at your biography, it's quite extensive, so I picked out some highlights. You were a cabinet minister, a European Commissioner for several terms, a recipient of three honorary doctorates, and after concluding your terms as a Commissioner a decade ago, you were named a member and co-chair of the International Resource Panel. People would like to know what you're doing these days.

Dr Potočnik: The International Resource Panel is an important story. There are three important scientific-political associations under the auspices of the UN. The one most people are familiar with is IPCC, the International Panel for Climate Change. Then we have IPBES, which studies biodiversity and extinctions. Finally, there's our panel, the International Resource Panel. These are all UN panels. Our panel is in charge of all natural resources, how they are managed, and their connections with the business world. While the first two panels deal more with the consequences, we deal more with the causes and what needs to be changed to prevent the consequences.

Host: With your PhD in economics, what's your view? Capitalism used to be all about profit, and things such as natural resources and the wages of workers were forgotten. How do good companies behave today?

Dr Potočnik: Good companies are still primarily measured by their performance, and that's OK. The problem is more in what market signals we send to manufacturers and consumers, and how we define the value of natural resources. They're often priceless. Natural resources tend to have an inherent value, but when you place them in the context of a market economy, elements to which you don't assign a value won't be used responsibly. They'll be used excessively, and that's happening with our use of various natural resources, from water, soil, building materials, and metals to energy and everything else we need. If these things aren't valued correctly, the manufacturers get the message that they don't need to care about resources and aren't responsible if they'll be available to future generations, as long as they make a profit for themselves right now. In the meantime, the consumers get the message, and this happens a lot during the Green Transition, that everything connected with the Green Transition is more expensive in some way. Healthy food is more expensive, as are environmentally friendly food and electric cars, when compared to cars with internal combustion. And this is precisely the wrong signal. We were taught in school that price signals are the key market signals, so if we receive such signals, then playing on the conscience of people is a bit... hypocritical. It doesn't match what we're preaching to them via the market. The market is telling them to behave differently.

Host: How can an average European or Slovenian with an average wage adapt to this new reality? You mentioned that diesel cars will no longer be available; electric cars are more expensive, and we know what our wages are like. What does the future hold?

Dr Potočnik: You mentioned the key point that I try to emphasize when I speak with my international contacts. If there are no socially acceptable preconditions for the Green Transition, it won't happen.

Host: What form should that take? Subsidies?

Dr Potočnik: No. When distributing things, we simply... Too many people are living on the edge these days. For instance, there has been quite a bit of talk about artificial intelligence. Perhaps you remember what Elon Musk said recently, namely that when AI becomes widespread, we won't need jobs for people. That means we'd have to move toward a universal basic income. Otherwise, we know what would happen in our societies. We'd have people out of jobs.

Host: Could Slovenia be the first country with a UBI? There has been a lot of talk about that.

Dr Potočnik: It's right that we're talking about that today because that's where society is headed, but in the context of the Green Transition, it's important that we don't... Creation is the key, because if you don't create, you can't share, but all the mathematical models indicate that our economic system is making the rich richer and the poor relatively poorer. That doesn't mean that they don't have more in absolute terms, but they're poorer relatively speaking. Experts who work in this field tell us that only redistribution can address those challenges. My point is that if we wish to carry out the Green Transition, all governments need to tackle not just how we're going to create, but also how to achieve fairer redistribution, which is vital, and to ensure all preconditions. The environment and social welfare are two sides of the same coin. In practice, you can't introduce things that aren't acceptable. Anyone who has been a minister or involved in governance knows this very well. That's why creating these preconditions is the key.

Host: Is Slovenia on the right track in terms of the Green Transition? How achievable are the goals approved by the European Commission last week, such as cuts in various emissions, which were also covered by COP28. Is Slovenia prepared for that?

Dr Potočnik: I cannot say whether Slovenia is ready or not, because I do not know the situation so precisely. But I do know that the 90%, which is the goal for 2040, is a very ambitiously set objective. However, goals are always achievable. Where there is a will, there is a way. I believe that one of the fundamental lessons that we can take away from the period of the COVID pandemic, is a number of messages that are very important for people. First, if we see something as serious, we also react seriously. Secondly, governments generally react insufficiently, too slowly and only once it is already unavoidable. Thirdly, the financial and innovation potential can be activated very quickly. We saw how quickly it activated and how much funding was mobilised. Fourthly, are systemic changes possible? Many say that systemic changes are too hard. In 2019, when COVID started, without COVID, working from home would have never been implemented. Now, working from home is completely normal. Regarding human needs, ask yourself, how many clothes did you need during COVID as opposed to before COVID.

Host: But that was when we worked at home and we could wear sweatpants.

Dr Potočnik: But that is an actual human need. Then ask yourself this: Were you more or less happy? This is a crucial question. But a negative lesson from this COVID context is that we are still not taking climate change seriously.

Host: Yes. Regarding Slovenia and climate change, we have many challenges. For instance, we have a lot of PM10 particles. We have contaminated areas from past industries, as you know very well. We also built the motorway network and now we all drive cars. I already asked, but do you think that we are on track to achieving these climate goals, considering our way of life?

Dr Potočnik: You mentioned a number of things that were accepted in the past but were not all optimal. We should focus more on riding trains and the railroad infrastructure as opposed to the roads, but we always have 20/20 hindsight. I think it is crucial that we understand where the mistakes were made so that we can fix them, and to not give any wrong signals. For instance, there is an issue with the traffic in Ljubljana. When the debate started on expanding the bypass by one more lane...

Host: And the Štajerska motorway.

Dr Potočnik: Yes. I said that this is the wrong signal. We should have said that in 15 years the use of personal vehicles inside the bypass will no longer be allowed except for residents. Then the infrastructure would have developed very quickly. You have to give clear, foreseeable, long-term signals. Without them you are a prisoner of short-term periods and short-term interests, which often differ from long-term interests. And then you get caught up in something and it becomes very difficult to change your situation. This happens often, in general, not just in Slovenia, because policies as a resource are often led very narrowly and the results are not viewed horizontally, as part of a whole. For example, how a measure implemented in the energy sector affects not only energy, but all areas of society. You simply have to look at things this way, otherwise you can quickly go from one bad situation to another, which you will have to fix in 10 years.

Host: This year we have the European elections, which will be attended by Slovenians who were born in the EU and know nothing else. Voting abstention is very high with young people. Why should they go vote?

Dr Potočnik: Because it is a good idea to attend all elections, not just these. We are a part of Europe, geographically, historically, economically... That is why there wasn't that much merriment when we acceded as there was in some other countries, because we saw it as a normal part of our maturing and our life. The message for those who can now go vote for the first time should be very simple. Do not go vote and later complain about the things you are unhappy with. That is nonsensical and unfair. But I would like to say this to the younger generation: Be active in this process because you are deciding your fate. Do not let others decide your fate because they will most often decide your fate in a way that maximises their gain here and now.

Host: Some young people are quite brave in deciding our fate. You mentioned Greta. She is an environmental activist bringing climate change to our attention. Then there is 8. marec fighting for a cleaner life for the residents of Anhovo. Some youths are environmentally conscious.

Dr Potočnik: Of course they are, we were talking about the elections, not groups that... I know a number of those groups. I collaborate a lot with young people and such groups because our interests are aligned. A few years ago, I said that the European Green Deal programme should be subtitled as "A pact with future generations", because that is precisely the message we are missing. The current generation should realise that it is not only working for its own good. Each measure should have a so-called long-term profile. It should be verified that it leads in the right direction. As families we would do anything so our children could have better lives. I do not see why we shouldn't do the same in our jobs.

Host: Do you think that the EU is still achieving its goals or not?

Dr Potočnik: You know why the EU formed, right? It has been achieving its goal, with minor ups and downs, more or less successfully for several decades. We do not know what could have been without it, but we do know how it is with it.

Host: Despite Russian aggression in Ukraine, on the edge of Europe?

Dr Potočnik: Yes. It is on the edge of Europe, but there used to be many conflicts in that area of Europe and we often found ourselves in the middle of them. I would like to highlight another dimension of the European Union that we often overlook. We are the first generation that has ever lived in a socio-ecological world of planetary dimensions. We are the first. We saw during the pandemic how connected we are, we see it with climate change, the internet, global trade... World War II only became a "world" war when nuclear weapons became part of the conflict, when weaponry that had a global impact was included. Today there are many global challenges. They cannot be solved partially, or just by Slovenia. You can only solve them if you renounce your sovereignty. The Paris Agreement is a sort of renunciation of sovereignty in the field of climate change. And you have to cooperate more than you did before. That is the only way toward a solution. The European Union is a good model where you can see a lot of things that worked well, and those that do not work as well and require more attention and greater effort. Many nations that do not live the way we do in the European Union look to us with some interest in how to use our experience. Ultimately, we will have to develop a far more effective method of global cooperation than the one we currently have, otherwise we simply will not solve certain problems.

Host: How well is Slovenia doing in Europe, on a scale of 1 to 5?

Dr Potočnik: There is no scale. Slovenia is probably regarded better in Europe than it is among its own residents.

Host: Interesting, even though a Eurobarometer survey shows that we are happy with the EU.

Dr Potočnik: No, no. I did not say how we regard the EU, but how we regard ourselves. The EU probably regards us better than we do ourselves. It may even see us as better than we really are. But we are a constructive partner in Europe, one that does not cause many problems, like some other countries. One whose more extreme inclinations are not as prominent or politically active. That is why Slovenia, with all its problems, and there are no countries that do not have them, is regarded as a normal partner. But we are a comparatively small country. The fact is that, if you are small, you can be more flexible, but it would be unfair of me to not point out that in Europe the large countries are heeded before the small ones due to their greater economic and political influence. But I think that there is no reason to start sounding any alarms in regard to Slovenia and Europe.

Host: You mentioned European countries that are perhaps more problematic, so to speak. Would abolishing the veto be a solution for the EU? Decisions have to be approved by 27 Member States.

Dr Potočnik: Not every issue can be vetoed, some require a majority. A completely fitting question is whether it would make more sense to move to majority decisions where consensus is still used. That is not a simple issue and these things are seriously debated at various conventions. I personally believe that more in-depth cooperation in more fields is simply the right thing to do. For instance, Member States have control over tax systems, but if we do not begin unifying them, as long as they remain competitive within the same space, we have a problem. There are European countries that are still regarded as tax havens and escape rooms for wealthy people and wealthy companies. We just quietly accept that, but it is an exceptional anomaly. So, we need more unification, but in the end the Member States must agree. The European Commission is often seen as technocratic, but its only power is that it can make proposals, which are adopted by the MS and Parliament. But once you adopt them, it is the EC's duty to make sure you are implementing them. That is what hits a nerve for some, but they already accepted it.

Host: Would EU enlargement perhaps help?

Dr Potočnik: EU enlargement makes sense. I have always believed that, if Europe wants to realise the dream it has had since the start, to be a place of peace, stability, prosperity and common values, it cannot be done without including certain parts that have historically had the most friction and where sparks sometimes turned into wildfires. The Balkans must be part of the European Union, some other countries probably as well. I would also be very happy to talk about Turkey and see it as a kind of bridge... We're talking about how strong the European Union wants to be, how much of a resounding voice, what role does it want to play. These are all questions, but when we talk about enlargement, I would say another thing. It is very important that in this process the countries that join the EU are as prepared as possible. We've learned two things from the consequences of our enlargement. The first one is that changes are actually happening. We have the power to change countries much more during the rapprochement than later during membership. And the second one, it's very important how... Now I've forgotten what the second one was, to be honest. It's important, but maybe I'll remember.

Host: To resolve border issues?

Dr Potočnik: Border issues are a part of it. If they are not solved, they are transferred to the EU, where all the members are equal, and then many times the question you mentioned yourself is consent, and then we're stuck. So I think it's very important that these two things are looked at together, and that we think about the role of Europe in a more strategic way.

Host: I already mentioned the latest Eurobarometer survey. It was done last year; it measures public opinion. It shows that the people of Slovenia feel like citizens of the EU and that we're above average in favour of EU policies and proposals. On the other hand, if we go back a little to environmental problems, we see farmers' protests, even in Slovenia due to Natura 2000. We see the French farmers; the farmers' protest has been going on for quite a few weeks. Why is there such a gap? Is Europe still alienated from its people or not? To what do you attribute this gap?

Dr Potočnik: Is the EU alienated from its people? I would urge the people to approach the EU, because it's hard for the EU to approach the people. But all these things you've mentioned... I think it's nice to see such an attitude to the EU in Slovenia. It's only right. There are certain protests, but there will always be protests. It's only right. By the way, talking about the farmers, I think they're right in many ways. Sometimes everything appears to be a conflict between environmentalists and farmers, but the vast majority of farmers and environmentalists have exactly the same interest. Who doesn't want to preserve the biodiversity of pollinators or quality land that will give better crops? But farmers should... For a decent living, farmers should first gain a recognition on the market. Their share in the food chain should increase compared to the share of other stakeholders in the food chain. But they don't have much bargaining power in the food chain. These are the basic questions. In the end, these things... You mentioned Natura 2000, let me tell you what I think about that. Thank God Slovenia decided... I don't know how it got to almost 38%, we're the country with the largest share of Natura 2000. Believe me, in the long run, this is the greatest wealth we could have secured for posterity. Yes, in the short term, it causes some problems here and there, but Natura 2000 was never intended as an area completely protected from humankind. It was meant as a responsible coexistence of man and nature, always. But the farmers are absolutely right, if someone declares a part of their territory protected, in this case, if there is a public interest, there must also be public money to compensate for this fact. It's often the case in Slovenia... I've also seen this in other areas, for example, with cultural heritage. You can't have... For example, I come from Kropa. You can't have an entire village culturally protected, but when there is a need for public money, after all it's in the public interest, there's no money or it's hard to get. Public interest must be accompanied by public funding. It's better to protect less, but effectively. In the case of Natura 2000, we have a common agricultural policy, we have a big EU budget, but if farmers were compensated enough through the market, then this money, instead for compensation of their loss of income, could be used to help them shift to long-term sustainable farming. This is again in the public interest.

Host: But it's more expensive.

Dr Potočnik: Yes, but aren't you interested in eating healthier food?

Host: Very much so.

Dr Potočnik: So why not? I just want to say that public money cannot primarily cover some private interests. Public money must take care of the public interest. We can talk about how broad this public interest is, of course. Preserving the countryside is a public interest, it has no direct connection with farming, but it should absolutely be something we support. In any case, the money we have today should to a much greater extent be directed to support changes, while the basic activity should be profitable on the market, so that people, in this case farmers, could live decently. I come from a farm and I know exactly what it is to work on a farm. If there was anything I really hated in my youth, it was...

Host: Harvesting potatoes?

Dr Potočnik: No, no. I was basically a sport addict. When the weather was nice, we were in the field making hay, when the weather was bad, we were free.

Host: That doesn't work.

Dr Potočnik: That didn't work out well. That memory stayed with me, but I will always respect farm work.

Host: We have a positive trend in feeling European, but we are less in favour of the proposal of a common European policy on immigration. We're also talking about the climate refugees; we're talking about the people from war-ridden countries. Prime Minister Robert Golob proposed educational centres be set up in Africa, where Africans could study European languages, and learn to live in Europe, thereby stopping illegal migration and the many casualties of the Mediterranean Sea and getting the necessary labour force. Do you think this is a solution for Africa? You're often there.

Dr Potočnik: I would go a step further. We have to look at the historical relationship between Africa and Europe. We know that many European countries were colonisers, more colonisers of natural resources than people, the colonisation of people was a consequence, but of access to natural resources, as always in history. Whether it was gold, oil, I don't know... Any other thing a nation could import to become rich. Cheap labour as well. There was a lot of that in history. In fact, if we look at when these countries became independent, it's usually in the 20th century. Not that long ago, is what I'm trying to say. Today people from these countries, mainly because they have worse living conditions at home or, God forbid, there are still conflicts, wars, of course, they want to come to Europe, because we are close, just across the Mediterranean Sea. The access via Italy is very fast. This pressure of migration is something we can't expect to calm down. For me, the first and most essential policy, if I paraphrase the former US president who said 'America first', for Europe it would be 'Africa first'. We simply have to start working systematically. I think Italy proposed this in its latest conclusions. We need to work systematically on essentially helping Africa back to its feet as much as possible, ensuring the conditions for lower migration, and at the same time, when it occurs, taking similar measures or measures that would mitigate such things. But I think education is essential. Education of women, especially young girls. It is essential to invest in infrastructure. China is very present in infrastructure investments in Africa. This is a sort of soft colonialism. They're building bridges to access natural resources. Today, countries that think strategically see everything through natural resources, where and how they will be able to build bridges.

Host: I see the African Continent as the First World dumping ground.

Dr Potočnik: Yes, that is part of the moral debt we owe. I think the awareness that this is not right is increasing. Above all, the African countries are getting louder in saying this shouldn't be the case and it is not right. The new efforts, connected to the transition to renewable energy sources. Because the needs for so-called critical materials are very large. Both on the side of production of new energy infrastructure, and in the use of electricity, an electric car uses several times more of these critical raw materials than a conventional car with internal combustion. Today, these thoughts appear in this context. My thinking goes a step further. Not to think where we will diversify and where we will get, let's think... We don't need a car, we need mobility. Let's think about implementing a mobility system, investing in a system that will eventually lead to needing fewer cars per family, relieving the burden of private cars, and at the same time offering alternatives to people, so they can have choices they don't have today. Many people today, especially the youth, are very, very aware and like to do that, also because they often have no alternative, no other choice. But it is only right to think exactly in this direction. You don't need a chair, you need to sit. We've already seen such things in history. We don't need CDs or tapes, we need to listen to music, and today that's basically dematerialised.

Host: I'm laughing because I'm trying to imagine Slovenians giving up cars.

Dr Potočnik: They're not giving up...

Host: It's a status symbol.

Dr Potočnik: It was a status symbol of my generation, for the youth it's no longer a status symbol. If our generation wants to enforce these status symbols on the younger generation, God help us. We would live in a world that we made wrong. Today, we have a wasteful and unfair economic system, and we all know that. If we won't change that, let's stop dreaming about dealing with climate change and other things, let's stop talking about the younger generation, because we don't care about them, we're closing the doors for them, and causing them problems.

Host: The end will be tied to what you just said. How would you describe yourself in five words? I've spoken to your colleagues from the past, you'll see how they described you. It relates to the things you've spoken about. But first, describe yourself in five words.

Dr Potočnik: Let me say something first. I've never been in favour of people evaluating themselves, because everyone usually sees themselves a little better than they really are. It's also not right, at the end of the day, these things... I've never been a fan of, say, at the end of the mandate, standing in front of a microphone and listing your achievements.

Host: You know we're evaluating managers and leaders.

Dr Potočnik: It's only right to evaluate leaders, even though... In any case, I would dare to claim I'm hard-working, I always want to cooperate with others, I strive for collective action, because I'm sure it's simply the only solution. I'm always ready to discuss even the most difficult things with everyone, but not on a personal level. You always have to discuss problems in such a way that you eliminate the emotional, personal... Don't go into personal disputes. If you don't agree about something, you don't agree about the problem, and I'm ready to talk about that as much as you want, but you can't make the other person feel bad or offend them with anything. I've learned in all these negotiations that if you want to achieve anything, you need to put yourself in the shoes of the person you're talking to, try to understand them, and then try to achieve what you want and what you know is right by convincing them. Involvement is one of the key things for me, if you want to be successful in these kinds of processes. Otherwise... If you don't do it, you can't do it later. When you accept something in a small circle, and then try to sell it in a wider circle, there's always a problem, because people just don't feel the ownership. When you don't have that... There's one more thing in life that is far more important, and that's trust. It takes a lot to build it, but you can lose it very quickly. These things... Interpersonal relationships are mostly built on trust. Above all, now that I am older than 65, I've come to the realisation that by far the most important thing in life is what you spend your time on and whom you share it with. That's the only real commodity that isn't in abundance and you don't know how much of it you have.

Host: Let me tell you how other people see you. As a forward-looking strategist. Would you agree?

Dr Potočnik: Yes, I try to think ahead, if possible.

Host: You've just shown that by talking about how we should live to help the planet. Do you agree?

Dr Potočnik: I am working in this direction. I'm reluctant to repeat this, but... I like to talk about the key values I think should be followed. I try to do that in my life, but let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

Host: Thank you very much for this conversation.

Dr Potočnik: Thank you.

Host: Dear viewers and listeners, thank you for being with us in this episode of the GOVSI government podcast. Goodbye.