We talked to Martin Schulz, the favourite to win the European Parliament's presidential elections. But, as he says, it's not yet set in stone.

Interview: Who's the next President?

https://api.multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/documents/20125/15810906/n003-0164-en_mf.srt

Martin Schulz, in a week you should be  President of the European Parliament.

Many people say that this kind  of certainty is not appropriate anymore.

That's what Diana Wallis says,  and Nirj Deva,

whom we have just interviewed.  What do you say?

It's false to think  that it's a certainty.

One is elected after a vote  and not beforehand.

That's why I'm speaking  to all political groups.

I've spoken to the Liberals,  the Greens, the Left,

and I've spoken  to the European Conservatives.

I've even spoken to the people of UKIP  to gain their trust.

I don't campaign on the basis  of an agreement between two groups

but because I want to have the majority  of MEPs behind me.

even as a result of an agreement  between two groups.

What would change  with Martin Schulz in charge?

Would the Parliament  become more visible?

We must be bullish  about representing the Parliament

There's a tendency in the Commission  and the Council -

less so in the Commission,  more in the Council -

What would be the first steps  if you were elected next week?

Firstly, I'd pay a visit  to the Commission.

Because I want the Commission  and the Parliament to close ranks

so that they defend the institution  that is the European Union

against today's dangerous tendencies  of renationalisation.

Secondly, I will fight  for the Parliament

to be sat at the same table  when it comes to the fiscal union,

on an equal footing with the ECB,  the Commission and the Council.

Those are the two major projects  of the coming weeks.

And I already wish you good luck  for next week,

if indeed the result is still open,  as you say. You're confident?

I'm confident of getting the majority.  And it's probable.

But I contest this idea  that an understanding

between the groups that represent  70% of MEPs is undemocratic.

Mrs Wallis for instance is a member  of the Liberals.

The Liberals had an agreement  with the EPP in the penultimate period.

Otherwise the Liberal MEP Pat Cox  would never have been President.

Such agreements also exist in  the group that Mrs Wallis belongs to.