Index 
 Previous 
 Next 
 Full text 
Verbatim report of proceedings
Wednesday, 21 July 2004 - Strasbourg OJ edition

6. Statement by the President-designate of the Commission
MPphoto
 
 

  President. The next item is the statement by the President-designate of the Commission.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Barroso, President-designate of the Commission. (ES) Mr President, my dear José, I warmly congratulate you on your election. I wish you and the institution you preside over every success.

 
  
  

(PT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I feel privileged to stand here before the first democratically-elected Parliament of an enlarged European Union. You are the representatives of 450 million Europeans. This assembly symbolises the renaissance of freedom and democracy – spreading to every corner of our continent from the Mediterranean to the Baltic Sea. Never before has there been an experiment like ours: to forge, democratically, a union out of the nations of Europe, which have such diverse and such rich traditions. We are united in our diversity – national, regional, cultural, linguistic and political. Over 50 years we have designed a new and unique way of working together. We have pooled our sovereignty to face common challenges. We have shown that our nation states are stronger when we act together in areas where Europe delivers the best results. Let us never underestimate this great European achievement. Our vision of integration provides an example for other regions. As Jean Monnet said, ‘la Communauté n’est qu’une étape vers les formes d’organisation du monde de demain.

The first of May was an event of historic proportions with the accession of ten new Member States. What we must now do is work together to ensure the success of a reunited Europe, in order to guarantee prosperity, solidarity and security for our continent. I come from a small country which has experienced the transition from dictatorship to democracy; a country on the edge of our continent, but with its heart at the very centre of Europe. I stand for the basic values that underpin our Union: freedom, respect for human rights, the rule of law, equality of opportunity, solidarity and social justice. My values and my experiences will allow me, if I receive your endorsement, to build bridges across the Union. This is why I believe I received the unanimous support of the European Council. I am conscious that one of the main tasks of the President of the Commission is to manage the dynamic consensus that Europe needs. Our Union must more than ever have a strong and independent Commission. Only then can we produce results that translate into concrete benefits for our citizens.

 
  
  

(EN) These beliefs and convictions lead me to launch a challenge today. I would like us, together with Member States, the social partners, businesses and citizens across the Union, to build a partnership for Europe – a partnership for prosperity, solidarity and security in our continent. We must build our Europe together. Words must be transformed into actions. We must argue the case for our Union every day, and the best argument is our results.

We must show our citizens that Europe can deliver what it promises effectively, efficiently and transparently. However, we must also be aware of the level at which things are best done: European, national or regional, with full respect for the principle of subsidiarity. What we do we must do well. This means we must concentrate on the questions that are most important to our citizens.

In building our partnership for Europe we must recognise that the biggest challenge we face is not the Euroscepticism of the few but the Euro-apathy of the many. We must listen to those who voted in last month's European elections, but we must also hear the silence of those who – for whatever reason – chose not to vote. Our goals are prosperity, solidarity and security and we must show concrete results: the euro, delivering monetary stability and investment, a single market fuelling growth, competition and jobs, a unique social model protecting the weakest in our society and helping people adapt to changing circumstances, quality public services offering affordable access for all, a sustainable approach to the environment and – perhaps of greatest importance – peace and stability in our region and beyond.

Last month we put the final touches to our Constitutional Treaty. This is also European practice: delivering a vision, adapting to change. That Treaty consolidates and simplifies the Union, it strengthens our democratic base by extending this Parliament's powers and by finding innovative ways to give a greater voice to national parliaments and to Europe's citizens. It will make us more effective in tackling areas where common action is needed. It will be a great challenge.

The challenge now is ratification. It will be a crucial moment and lead to a broad discussion on the kind of Europe people want. The new Commission, this Parliament and Member States must be ready with answers. We must make the case for Europe and this will be a huge communication challenge. To win that debate, we should not have a bureaucratic or a technocratic approach, we need instead political leadership and political courage.

The partnership I propose must, therefore, respond to the concerns of our citizens. Today is not the moment to unveil a detailed programme. If I receive your backing, I first want to discuss policy ideas within the college, then with you and with the Council. The new Constitutional Treaty already foresees that we must put our objectives together. If confirmed, early in 2005 I will bring before you and the Council proposals for the overall strategic priorities to guide our work for the years ahead. Such an agenda of prosperity, solidarity and security must deal with the most pressing challenges for our peoples today.

Europe and the world are changing, and we need to change too. Reforms are needed. If we want Europe to work we must give people jobs. But employment will only be created if we get the right environment for enterprise and, at the same time, we must invest more in skills and training. We must put growth centre stage. Our social ambition must be fuelled by economic success. Wealth creation is the key to our model of social solidarity and sustainability. This is at the core of the Lisbon Agenda. Entrepreneurship and innovation must be harnessed to deliver a better quality of life. We must never forget the economy is there to serve the people and not the other way around. This is the spirit in which we must also interpret the stability and growth pact. This means ensuring the flexibility needed to keep us on the path to growth and employment, whilst preserving monetary stability.

We must also meet the challenges of globalisation. This means facing up to competition in open global markets. It also means spreading prosperity and opportunity around the world. The Union needs to match its political ambition with its financial resources. You cannot have more Europe for less money, especially if we want a similar level of solidarity towards the new Member States as we have shown to the less-developed regions in the past. However, we must also be able to show to taxpayers that the money they entrust to Europe is spent prudently. We need to ensure that we foster stability and invest for growth. This means sound public finances, but also 21st-century networks and strong services of general interest to knit our economies and continent together.

Health and social protection systems need to prepare for an ageing population and, together with education, these services must be more than just a safety net.

Our future success will depend on our willingness to take risks, be ready for change and to introduce reforms. Our scientists, universities and companies should keep us at the cutting edge of technology. We must also ensure that understandable public fears about new science are properly and democratically addressed.

We must deliver a better quality of life. This means taking decisions now to create the right incentives for cleaner energy and transport. We must live up to our international agreements in Kyoto and make sure that our partners do the same. We must balance decisions today against their impact on growth, jobs and the environment tomorrow if we are to offer the coming generations a truly sustainable future.

The construction of an area of freedom, security and justice remains one of our most important strategic objectives. The Commission should remain a driving force helping to create the conditions needed for the removal of internal borders and the strengthening of the Union's external borders. Taking forward policies on immigration, asylum and the integration of immigrants in our society are other key elements.

In addition, we must implement the counter-terrorism action plan. Terrorism is the biggest threat to freedom in Europe and in the world today.

On the world stage we must spread peace and stability. This applies as much to our nearest neighbours as to the support that we give to the role of international institutions such as the United Nations. We must keep the spotlight on conflict prevention and on the eradication of poverty and disease, particularly in Africa. These are some of the issues that will provide the policy backdrop for our action. In all of this our challenge is one of changing attitudes, not changing values.

 
  
  

(FR) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union is a bold and unprecedented experiment.

The Commission itself is a unique institutional innovation, as befits the European journey. A strong Commission must be open; it must consult and listen in continuous dialogue with civil society, the social partners and the regions. To do all this, the Commission relies on the quality and independence of its members and the talent and dedication of its staff.

I can assure you today that I am determined, with your support, to preside over a Commission that will work as a team, bringing together a variety of talents and skills, the best that national traditions have produced, and that the Commission will have to meet the highest standards of excellence in public life. With that in mind, I want the next Commission to have a greater proportion of women than any previous one.

(Applause)

We need to give the Council an understanding of how necessary this is, since it shares with me the responsibility for drawing up the list of candidates for the posts of commissioner. I shall exercise the full extent of my powers under the treaties as regards the selection of future commissioners, the allocation of portfolios at the start of and during their terms of office, and the direction of their work. The importance of collective responsibility will also have to be fully recognised and we shall have to ensure that this college, with its twenty-five members, will be able to act swiftly, effectively and coherently. Quite apart from that, one thing that must be clear is that there will be no first and second-class commissioners in the Commission over which I shall preside.

(Applause)

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission and Parliament must work together in a positive spirit, while respecting each institution’s competences. I therefore give you my firm commitment to cooperate closely with Parliament in complete transparency and always to take account of your views, even when we disagree. I promise you three things in particular:

Firstly, if a commissioner is clearly not up to his or her job or he or she fails in his or her obligations under the Treaty, I will not hesitate in asking him or her to resign.

Secondly, I recognise the importance of the democratic control exercised by Parliament. I shall therefore endeavour to provide you quickly with all the information you need for the purpose. I also promise to inform you about documents sent to the other institutions and about the consultative bodies used by the Commission.

Thirdly, I will maintain a regular dialogue with Parliament. As well as coming to speak to you about the state of the Union at your first plenary session each year, I will be regularly attending the Conference of Presidents.

Your commitment and active support are essential if the Commission is to be at its most effective and Europe is to play a front-line role. You are the voice of the peoples of Europe. I need your support because Europe needs a strong, credible and independent Commission. I pledge to work actively for Europe to be much more than just a market. I want a Europe that is also social and cultural. Culture must remain at the heart of our partnership for Europe.

Let us together open a new chapter in European integration and give clear voice to our common desire to work for the benefit of Europe’s citizens. We must not be afraid of the future: the future is in our hands. Let me say in conclusion, as one politician speaking to other politicians, that I fully understand the historic responsibility of this very special moment. It is essential that this enlargement is a success. Europe must be a success.

If I am speaking of the Commission’s role, it is not because I am already defending my territory or my institution, but it is because, on the strength of my experience, I believe that the Commission can be the system’s great mediator. That it can play the part of honest broker between the various institutions. In this regard, I also want to tell you that we need political direction. We all have political ideas, and just as we have political ideas, friends and allies, we also have adversaries. Finally, I also want to add that if I am elected I want to work with all of you. I shall of course be closer to those who, like myself, support the advancement of the European agenda and are for the European Union. What I want to say to you, however, is that I shall not be the President of the right against the left or of the left against the right. I will not be the President of one part of Europe against another part of Europe, because I am convinced that my election will allow a bridge to be built between the founding members and the new members of Europe, between the richer and the poorer, between the countries at the centre and those on the periphery, between the larger countries and the smaller countries, because we need them all. I promise to work with everyone for the good of our Europe. Thank you for your attention.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Poettering (PPE-DE). (DE) Mr President, Mr President-designate of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, our Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats welcomes the unanimous proposal by the Heads of State or Government of the countries of the European Union that José Manuel Durão Barroso should become President of the European Commission. Mr Barroso said he comes from Portugal, which we all know, from a country at the edge of the European Union but at the heart of Europe. I liked that turn of phrase very much because it says right at the outset that we are Europeans because we have a home somewhere. Being Europeans does not mean giving up our native country or our homeland. On the contrary, it all goes together and that is why it is important that people who aspire to positions of responsibility also declare their allegiance to the country they come from. If it lies at the heart of Europe, at the centre of the European Union, that is also an expression of allegiance to the common work of uniting Europe, which is something we all want to make a success.

As Mr Jan-Peter Balkenende, the President of the European Council, said here this morning, this Europe is a Europe of values, and there is a relationship and a balance between those values. You described that balance: freedom, human rights, democracy, the rule of law, solidarity and social justice. If we take these values seriously, we must of necessity take it for granted that the President of the Commission will not divide but will bring together. For all the disputes we may have in this House over individual issues, it is after all our common aim to serve this continent. You said you want a strong and independent Commission, that you want to lead, but that you want to work on proposals as a team, and that is what we want. We do not want to have the impression any more that the President of the Commission plays only a subordinate role when in summit with the Heads of State or Government; we want the President of the Commission, with the President-in-Office of the Council, to play the leading role at the summit meetings of the European Union countries.

(Applause)

We believe you can do this. At the same time, you also know that the Commission can only be strong if it has the broad majority of the European Parliament behind it. The European Commission is the guardian of the Treaties. European Union law must never be handled in an opportunistic manner, or we are lost, and that, for a president, is the first principle of leadership. You also said you will dismiss from office a member of the Commission who behaves inappropriately. That was also what we agreed with Romano Prodi five years ago. We also agreed that the members of the Commission, including its President, will give account here in plenary session whenever Parliament demands it. I do not want to start an argument at this point over whether the Commission is a kind of government. If you are elected, Mr candidate President (I do not know the correct way to address you other than as candidate for the office of Commission President), – which our group hopes that you will be, and it will do all it can to see that you are – we expect you, as elected President, to appear before the European Parliament whenever Parliament demands, just as a national head of government appears before his own national parliament as a matter of course. That is what we expect of you and of all members of the Commission.

(Applause)

It is in this way that we will exercise our control if the Commission is eventually endorsed. You spoke of a partnership for Europe. I believe it is very important that we should be real partners, across party lines and across national borders, especially now that ten new countries have joined the European Union, and above all that we should offer something to the young generation, to the young people who need a good education, who have to be well educated if we are to achieve the Lisbon objective of being a really competitive place in the world. That is why we must give our continent’s young people a chance.

You spoke in favour of the principle of subsidiarity; as my time is limited, I will not enlarge on this point but I would like to mention again the young woman Mr Balkenende spoke of this morning, Ilma Kaulina in Riga, who said: ‘I believe in the future of Europe’. Ladies and gentlemen, we all believe in the future of Europe and that is why we should give this candidate, who like his country is at the heart of the European Union, a chance so that tomorrow we will be able to say we have a new President of the European Commission.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Schulz (PSE). (DE) Mr President, Mr Barroso, ladies and gentlemen, a lot has already been written about your candidature. A lot has been written and discussed about packages, agreements, whatever. A lot of it was wrong. One thing was especially wrong: the story that you were the European People’s Party candidate was completely wrong. The European People’s Party candidate was called Patten, but he was not adopted.

You are the Council’s candidate and that is how we are examining you. As Members of the European Parliament, we have to ask ourselves what our relationship is to you in this present situation. We see ourselves as a parliamentary group that should be free and unfettered in considering whether you are the right candidate for the office of Commission President and that must look at the terms on which it is to decide whether you are the right candidate or not. We invited you to our group and asked you questions in a very detailed and open discussion. We have heard what you had to say today and I respect you for it. We must nevertheless repeat our questions to you, not all of them, but focussing on the essential aspects of the task that lies ahead of you.

Are you the man who can shape the Commission’s relationship with the other European institutions in the way that we as socialists expect? Are you the strong personality who, as President of the Commission, would fight for the Constitution if it comes into force? In the context of the Constitution, are you the person to say to the 25 Heads of State or Government: ‘This is where the European Commission stands in the interests of European integration; I have to represent its interests and I am not a former member of your club’? Are you the person who will drive integration forwards because it strengthens the Commission’s role as the strong institution in the inter-institutional structure of Europe?

The question we have to ask is: are you the right candidate for what we European Socialists see as the central task, that for which we fought for votes in the elections and which is our contribution to this Parliament, namely the task of preserving social Europe, are you the man to do that as part of his future activity? Can you guarantee that the Commission will strengthen the social model of a social Europe – people for people, one for another, social cohesion, and not everyone against everyone else? Can you guarantee that this model will be strengthened in the Commission, or are we running the risk of getting a Commission President who says: ‘I will use the slipstream of globalisation to bury in Europe the social rights people have fought for and won in the nation states’? As Social Democrats, these are the things we have to weigh up. That is the decisive point for us, we have asked you about it and we have heard interesting answers today.

The question we have to ask is: is the candidate capable of representing the European Union on the international stage in the way we expect? Are you in favour of sustainable development policy? Will you ensure that the European Union pursues a development policy that is geared to sustainability? Are you the man who will canvass in the European Union for a genuine new beginning when a fresh attempt is made after Cancún? Are you the man, as President of the Commission, to work for fair trade in the world on the basis of partnership between equals? Do you advocate an energy policy that conserves resources? Are you the right man to formulate and develop Europe as a values-based model of multilateralist democracy and present it on the international stage as an alternative to a unilateralist model based on stock market values? That is the question we are asking. Are you, for example, the candidate to deal with the USA as an equal when enforcing these demands?

These are the questions we asked you and we are asking them again today. We will take our decision in our group this evening on the basis of your answers to these questions. You have been asked a lot of questions; you have answered many to our satisfaction, but many you have not.

I can announce here and now that we will – as I have described – have a frank discussion of this in the group this evening. I will not be able to tell you the result until tomorrow. I want to make one thing perfectly clear, and it is not directed at you personally: the manner in which you were nominated is not acceptable, and I think this is the last time that a candidate for the Presidency of the Commission will be nominated in that way.

(Applause)

If the Constitution becomes reality, there will be competition for this office, where programmes and persons representing those programmes will be presented to voters in competition with each other. We are working for all that, and that is why we need the Constitution.

May I say one thing in conclusion? No one can satisfy all the requirements I have listed here 100% all of the time, that is impossible, especially if he is not a member of the Group of the Party of European Socialists, which you are not. One can come close to it, however. We shall be considering how close you have come to it in what you have said.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

   Watson (ALDE). Mr President, Mr President-designate of the Commission, a few years ago you left an interesting hostage to fortune in an interview which was reported widely in the European press. I am not sure exactly what inspired your comment but you said: 'Imagine a large plane, and then go into the cockpit and there is no one at the controls'. Describing the European Union, you said it was a plane without a pilot. Now, Mr Barroso, you are applying for a pilot's licence. Before we grant it to you, Liberals and Democrats in this House want to hear from you about your flight plan and your destination. We want a hands-on pilot at the controls of the European Union.

We asked for clarity about the subject of Super Commissioners, a better gender mix in the Commission and a commitment to transparency and individual accountability for Commissioners.

You have addressed these points in your remarks today and my Group will reflect on what you said and come to a common view on your candidacy.

You have impressed Liberals and Democrats in this House with your candour and your competence. You have spoken charismatically and confidently about your vision for Europe. We believe you have treated this House with respect, and have come before its Members ready to listen and ready to convince.

We have made no secret of our distaste for the Justus Lipsius carpet market which produced your nomination. We look forward to the day when these choices are made not behind closed doors but in open debate, the day when it is Parliament and the voters of Europe who determine which candidate should be there for our executive and the Council which does the approving!

Asked to explain your politics in recent weeks, you have described yourself as a reformist of the centre. You say you are a committed European. Perhaps I can define what Liberals and Democrats take such answers to mean.

To be a reformist of the centre is to believe in healthy democracy, robust economies, open markets and free and fair trade, to believe in a society that strives for the balance between the irreducible freedom of the individual and the solidarity that enables us to be a society at all.

You will be committed to the Lisbon Agenda – committed to the economic reform that can preserve Europe's prosperity for the future. You will want to see the European Union speak with a single voice in international affairs. You will believe that our institutions need to be more open and accountable, and brought closer to the people they represent. You will believe that when we serve our national or party political agendas over our European agenda, we do a disservice to our Union. If those are your ambitions then Liberals and Democrats in this House will support you and your Commission.

You said, Mr Barroso, that Europe's plane cannot fly with an empty cockpit. At such a time, we cannot afford to have unsteady hands at the controls. The twin gravities of public scepticism and blinkered ambition have the potential to ground us. The Commission's independence and strength are key to its effective leadership in Europe. You have said you would work to protect and preserve them – but the journey from Justus Lipsius to the Berlaymont is more than just crossing a Brussels boulevard. You come from the intergovernmental culture of the Council – are you ready to speak for the European Union?

I ask you to imagine a large plane – I hope an Airbus rather than a Boeing – with yourself at the controls. What kind of pilot would you be? What kind of plane is your Europe? What is your destination? Because the Union needs a global carrier, not a no-frills airline.

We need a Commission President who is going to lead from the front in the debate on the new European Constitution. Who will commit to travelling widely across our Union to make the case for Europe to Europe's citizens. Who will be an honest broker and an enforcer with national governments – often both at the same time. Who can master a hundred briefs and still find time to speak with vision and clarity about the future of our continent.

These are the qualities that Liberals and Democrats will be weighing up when we vote tomorrow, and which would ultimately define the success of your presidency and your Commission.

If we vote to approve your nomination as President of the Commission you can expect to find in us a constructive partner and a critical friend. In return, we will expect never to find, as you did, that the cockpit of Europe's aeroplane is empty or the hand on its rudder is unsure.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Cohn-Bendit (Verts/ALE). (FR) Mr President, Mr President of the Commission, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, we are witnessing an amazing spectacle today. It is like a dream come true.

If Mr Barroso is to be believed, it will be fantastic, we will all be showing solidarity, development will be sustainable, the environment will be respected, Europe will be powerful but prudent, Europe will be for multilateralism, in short, in five years’ time we will all be able to retire because paradise will have been achieved for everyone and the politicians will be able to shut up shop.

Not once did I hear the word ‘problem’. Perhaps Mr Barroso could explain to us why a conservative reformist who is allied with a party on the very far right in Portugal should suddenly become someone of the centre in Europe, both centre left and centre right. What a magical transformation! Which fairy touched him on the way from Dublin to Brussels? Can someone explain it to me so that I can understand what is happening?

Then Mr Barroso tells us he wants to be an honest broker. Personally, I do not trust people who tell me in advance that they are honest. You see, I want a politician who leads; I want a politician who takes initiatives. Going back to Mr Watson’s analogy, I agree there must be a pilot, but is that pilot going to change direction whenever one of his passengers or the control tower asks him to, the control tower being the Council, of course, and the passengers the 732 Members of the European Parliament? I would like to know how that pilot will operate in such conditions.

Another thing, Mr Barroso. You say you want a Europe that is like this or like that. You also say you will not be the tool of the Council; that is duly noted: you do not want to be the tool of the Council. Only the way in which you became President-designate of the Commission was nevertheless a distressing spectacle, you must agree: honest brokers were presented to the Irish Presidency which, hidden behind closed doors I know not where, produced candidates from one side or another, in the end telling us it had found the best: Mr Barroso! If you are the best candidate, why were you not the first? Why did we have to wait weeks and weeks to arrive at this splendid Barroso of such a vintage?

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that if we want to work together we must tell each other a few home truths. You are the third spare wheel. I am not criticising you for it, I am criticising the Council. It is on this matter that I ask this House one thing. If this House ever wants to be respected, it must send the Council a clear and determined ‘no’. The Council has never adopted a proposal from this House as it stood. The Council has torn up half of the Convention’s proposed Constitution, and, masochists that we are, we say well done and thank you. You offer us Barroso! Let us go for Barroso! We are doormats anyway. Well, doormats are not what we want to be!

This is not directed at you; what I am saying is that there is a fundamental problem with democracy in this Europe, that the Council, that the government people of which it is composed – even those of my favourite government, the German Government – are intergovernmental when they are in government. They must be made to understand once and for all that Europe is not just Europe’s Council, it is the Council, the Community institutions and the Commission; they have not understood that. If this House were to make my dreams come true and for once say no to the Council, then the Council would respect it for five years at any rate.

That is what we have to decide.

(Applause from the left)

That is why I appeal to the liberals, who have always fought for this House: you can do Europe a service today by making the Council understand that we will no longer tolerate its behaviour. That is why, after listening to Mr Barroso, after listening to Mr Poettering, after listening to Mr Schulz, after listening to Mr Watson, the Greens will vote no to Mr Barroso.

(Applause from the left)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Wurtz (GUE/NGL). (FR) Mr President, I shall not be taking the same tone as the previous speaker. My problem is not so much the Council as the policy that the future Commission President will follow.

My group has appreciated the readiness with which Mr Barroso has submitted to this crossfire, this barrage of questions from Members who were not among his closest political friends. This capacity for dialogue is a real quality, but it does not of course hide the well-known differences there are between us over the essential directions of European integration.

Economically and socially, Mr Barroso is a liberal. He has amply demonstrated that in the exercise of his national responsibilities. Even though the choices he made as Head of the Portuguese Government do not automatically mean he will take identical decisions in the European offices for which he is proposed, they clearly show where his preferences lie. They are revealing.

I would have liked Mr Barroso to have told us about the lessons he has drawn from his national experience for his European mandate, if he receives it. The severe cuts in public expenditure, including on education, in Portugal, for example, or the uncompromising application to the hospital sector of management criteria commonly used in private enterprise. Some have described it as shock therapy. If it was a real shock to the population, I think the truth is that the therapy itself is more than debatable for the economy of a country that has undergone a severe recession and is suffering from a chronic lack of investment in human resources despite these being the key to modern development.

What is your assessment of that experience, Mr Barroso? Do you think that is the way forward, or should we close our ears to the liberal siren song?

Up until now, we have been less familiar with Mr Barroso’s big international policy options, apart from one far from minor one which projected him on to the world stage; I am speaking of the famous Azores Summit of March 2003, of sad memory for us.

I have already had occasion to emphasise what the question of war and peace meant for our group and I will not return to it. I will say in more general terms that in my opinion for all the major positions of responsibility within the Union we need men and women who are prepared to consider far-reaching challenges to the severe trends that are plunging Europe into crisis before our very eyes and making it helpless in the face of many of the world’s problems. We are not suffering from an excess of lucidity in this regard but rather from a cruel lack of critical intellect that means we do not have a vision for the future that is capable of motivating us.

The world needs Europe, but a different Europe. We know that six million – yes, six million – people died of Aids, tuberculosis or malaria last year, that global warming is advancing much faster than the measures devised to contain it, not to mention that those measures are not being adhered to, that there are a billion people without jobs, that one human being in six has no access to drinking water, that war is brewing in the Middle East, continuing in Chechnya and bathing Darfur in blood; it is therefore our duty, at whatever level decisions are taken in Europe, to see further than the market and further, too, than mere Atlantic solidarity.

That, I think, is the challenge Europe has to face today. We really are not up to it. That is why, if we refuse to put our confidence in Mr Barroso tomorrow, that will not be a vote against an individual, it will be the expression of a universal call for change.

(Applause from the left)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Bonde (IND/DEM). (DA) Mr President, dear Mr Barroso, my group submitted three questions about greater openness and better control. You visited our group and acknowledged officials’ lack of accountability. We now hope that you personally will answer our questions frankly.

We want a President who himself dares to answer the crucial questions from the most critical group on such a pre-arranged occasion. We want a President who dares, and is able, to answer the questions himself and who dares to accept responsibility for the organisation as a whole. We have, for example, asked for an internal list of the more than 1 350 working parties in the Commission, which are all funded by European taxpayers. Who are the members of these? Who go to the meetings? Who have their travel expenses refunded? Why cannot we know these facts? Why, in the new accounting system too, will no one be in a position to reveal whether the same people have their travel expenses paid for more than one meeting in the same week? I am not saying that this happens. I am merely saying that we cannot check up on whether it is happening.

We want a Commission President who is prepared to make all the information and vouchers available to the Ombudsman, the Court of Auditors and the Committee on Budgetary Control. Mr Barroso, we are prepared to be pleasantly surprised, but I am obliged to say that we were given many more pledges by Mr Prodi when he took office than we have so far been given by yourself, and he, for his part, delivered the goods. Agendas and minutes from the Commission’s meetings can now be read by everyone on the Internet. It took Mr Prodi a whole legislative period to fulfil that pledge, but he kept his word. The Commission’s telephone directory is also available on the Net, provisionally and as an experiment.

Now, we must go further and have full scrutiny of the legislative process. We want to know what the Commission is proposing in the Council’s working parties. We want to know what is going on in the Commission itself. We also think that you should inaugurate a new era by providing courageous whistleblowers such as Paul van Buitenen, Marta Andreasen and Dorte Schmidt-Brown with full restitution of their civil rights. By pricking their bubble, whistleblowers woke the bureaucrats out of their dream. In yourself, I hope to see a President who is everything but the bureaucrats’ dream, and I am able to offer my group’s critical opposition. I hope that we see a President who dares to make available a list of the committees that get ideas on everything from rules governing the size of strawberries to a common criminal law.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Muscardini (UEN).(IT) Mr President, the President-in-Office of the Council has recalled that the June elections were an historic event, with the election to this House of 732 representatives of 25 European peoples.

The fact is truly historic, but I cannot hide my concern at the percentage turnout, which gets lower and lower from one election to the next. Citizens today are finding it difficult to identify with the European Union, which they see as too distant from their national realities and from the specific, legitimate, concrete interests that concern them. For democracy to be truly complete it has to be supported by the people, or else there is a serious danger that oligarchic systems or methods will arise. In order to inform and involve the citizens, we have to ask for appropriations for information campaigns on the activities of the Union and Parliament, but we must also look into the deep-seated reasons that have led the electorate to become disaffected in many of our countries. It is time to say that Euroscepticism, like Euroenthusiasm, are the two sides of a coin that the citizens are rejecting, because they are calling strongly for Eurorealist policies and for proper application of the subsidiarity concept. In other words, let Europe do what the nation states cannot do by themselves.

In this Eurorealist view, we think of a Europe that is actively involved in matters connected with the economic revival to combat unemployment and increase development, a Europe able to point out its own path to guide globalisation along and not be subjected to it any longer, as has happened so far, and to propose new economic rules that can prevent further speculative bubbles. The rules of economics and finance on which we base all our policy belong to the last century and are outdated. We must identify some new ones suited to the reality of the third millennium. Europe must be united in the fight against terrorism and organised crime and in encouraging the growth of democracy in those countries where it is still denied. Human rights, personal dignity, respect for freedom and the pursuit of peace must not remain just documents signed by the three Community institutions but must become economic, political and cultural actions directed towards those parts of the world where suffering and misery are tragic realities.

Within this framework, we see an urgent need for a Mediterranean policy which, having sanctioned principles in the past, is today at last being translated into concrete actions. We must re-engage the Community institutions to achieve development compatible with the adaptation times of human beings, safeguarding the environment as a source of life and a guarantee for the future of humanity, and paying greater attention to the enterprise concept, even at the smallest and most home-made scale.

Mr President, while the Union for Europe of the Nations Group confirms its vote for you and wishes you all the best in your work, it would also recall that, while we certainly need a pilot in the cabin of the aircraft, we also need a President who can travel around Europe to get to know others and to make himself known. Otherwise we shall continue to hear the silent protests of citizens who do not understand.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Martinez (NI).(FR) Mr President, Mr Barroso, ladies and gentlemen, if Figo’s Portugal was unable to take the European Cup, will Barroso’s Portugal take the European Commission, given that Mr Wurtz and Mr Cohn-Bendit are not Greeks? Having said that, I am personally pleased for you, even if you have very limited room for manoeuvre on the question of Turkey, for example, which the Prodi Commission has settled for you: you have inherited accession.

So far as the financial perspectives are concerned, you are limited not only by the 1.27% ceiling or the 1% ceiling. As for the budget rationing pact, in view of the judgment handed down by the Court of Justice there is little likelihood that you will be able to release its stranglehold and rid us of this Malthusian device that is the source of all the social wrongs of cuts in investment in railways, hospitals (in Portugal in particular), universities, and so on.

You have inherited the dismantling of the common agricultural policy, and as a Portuguese person you are aware of the consequences of that initiative, especially in the sugar beet and sugar sectors: your country will be one of the casualties. Will you be able to stand up to Hong Kong in the WTO’s Doha talks, to pressure from the Pacific nations, the group of 15, New Zealand, Australia, the group of 20, or 23 with Brazil, will you be able to withstand the pressure from the UK and US? Will you really be able to tell Mr Bush’s or Mr Kerry’s negotiators that the Americans must abandon their own subsidies first? Pascal Lamy could not do it in Cancun or Seattle, and I do not know whether your commissioner will be able to do it either.

In spite of all I have just said, because you are a man from a great country and from a people with a great history, like the men and women of Portugal watching the pilots leave the mouth of the Tagus on their way to conquer new stars – and even though I fear your institutional caravel will go round in circles in Brussels’ pond, or quagmire, of false economic ideologies  – I will wish Captain Barroso, the Commission and his 24 crewmen a fair wind. I will allow myself one observation, however. Your predecessor came from the daisy, you are a child of the carnation revolution; the 450 million Europeans would not want to usher in chrysanthemums.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Evans, Jonathan (PPE-DE). Mr President, I wish to begin by welcoming the President-designate of the Commission on behalf of the British Conservative delegation and our European Democrat colleagues. I want to make it clear that I speak as the leader of the party that was the outright winner of the European elections in the United Kingdom, with 28 seats.

You have shown, Mr President-designate, that you have a number of very impressive qualities that fit you for the post of President of the Commission. You have been a reforming Prime Minister of your country and, despite the setback of the recent football result, you personally can take pride in the fact that you have made a great contribution in enhancing your nation's profile and standing in Europe and beyond.

The next President inherits a Commission that has a major task to restore confidence amongst the peoples of Europe for what it does and how it does it. There have been attempts at reform in a number of areas during the presidency of Mr Prodi. However, I hope that the next President will be bold in reforming the Commission and its workings in a manner that genuinely meets the expectations of European citizens. I hope the next President will make tackling fraud, waste and maladministration a priority of his term of office. I am very encouraged by the remarks you made earlier about value for money in this area. These are matters that still cast too much of a shadow over the EU. We want to see the EU code of good administrative conduct made binding on all EU institutions and officials. We want to see stronger protection for whistleblowers. OLAF should be made fully independent with its own staff and budget and the EU needs a Commissioner with sole responsibility for budgetary control so that person can ensure that there is proper accounting and effective tackling of fraud.

As you made clear in your earlier remarks, Mr Barroso, competitiveness and enterprise are vital for Europe's economic future. The Lisbon process – even by the Commission's own admission – is failing to make the progress that you envisaged when you led that process. I congratulate you for the role you played then. Your future role – which I hope will be confirmed tomorrow – will be to ensure that directives take full account of the diversity of Europe and the circumstances of individual regions and industries. We believe strongly that impact assessments and price tags should be attached to all new EU proposals, including parliamentary amendments.

I want to see the next President work constructively with the United States to fully restore the Union's excellent relations with them. We all know the disagreements over Iraq, but they should now be put behind us. I have confidence that you are the sort of person who will be able to achieve that. I want to see an open and constructive dialogue across the Atlantic, unhindered by anti-American rhetoric, some of which, sadly, we hear too often within this Chamber.

If this House endorses your candidature tomorrow, as I hope it does, you have a great opportunity to deliver on a maxim which had great resonance in my country in the European elections: Europe should be doing less, but it should be doing it better.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Swoboda (PSE).(DE) Mr President, Mr Barroso, our president Mr Schulz has already said that the Group of the Party of European Socialists is only now forming its opinion, since this is done on the basis of facts and not of prejudices. I cannot, however, hide the fact that there are a number of highly critical points and that there is certainly a lot of distrust and a lot of criticism that I would like to clearly underline here and now.

The first point, which you can do nothing about personally, is the whole selection process. The shadow of that process has now fallen on you, and we have already made clear that this process, where, after so many names have been mentioned, one particular name emerges that was not mentioned at all in the beginning, is for us not an acceptable selection process. Perhaps, on the strength of your experience over the last few weeks, you can help us to at last bring about a different attitude in the relationship between Council, Parliament and Commission, especially with a view to and in connection with the new Constitution. That relationship has been upset by this very selection process in the last few months.

Secondly, my colleague Mr Wiersma will be speaking about foreign policy, but, Mr Barroso, at the hearing you failed to convince us about your behaviour in connection with the Iraq war. I am not concerned about the past, but about the future. How will you or would you act in a similar situation? Would you allow things to go on in a similar way, with various Heads of Government acting as they did in this case without waiting for the Commission or the Council to coordinate? How will you prevent us again blindly going along with the USA’s decisions, decisions, moreover, taken on the basis of false documents? The quite crucial question, however – and here, too, your answer so far has been completely unsatisfactory – is what European social model you stand for. You say you stand for one. You stress the importance of public services. You have not said you favour framework directives, you have not said that in this Europe public services should be protected, expanded and strengthened in the public interest. What you understand a social Europe to be falls short of our expectations. The same applies for jobs. Many people in this Europe fear that jobs are being lost as industries move to other parts of the world. What will you do to ensure that new jobs are created, that those jobs are preserved and that we remain competitive and at the same time a social Europe?

Finally, we were sorely disappointed when you resigned as prime minister immediately after your nomination, as though you had already been elected. You said that 50% plus one vote would be enough for you. If that is enough for you, then sometimes you might get 50% less one vote for your proposals in this House. That would be a pity. I do not know whether you will be elected tomorrow, but it is highly likely. You must prepare yourself for the fact that we, in the Group of the Party of European Socialists, will always be fair, but there will be severe arguments over this social Europe. If you do not show yourself more favourable to this ‘social Europe’, there will be some severe controversy. I nevertheless wish you luck in this argument that you will have with our group if you are elected.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  De Sarnez (ALDE). (FR) Mr President-designate, if this House gives its approval and you are appointed tomorrow, you will become the next President of the Commission at a crucial time for the future of our Union and for European integration.

Two major issues in fact face us in the next five years. The first is the kind of Europe we want. Do we want Europe to continue being just a free trade area resting essentially on the sum of national concerns, or do we want to build a genuine political union that will be a project we all share in and that will carry weight in the world? That is the question we must ask ourselves.

I am convinced that our fellow citizens expect us to build that political union. In an increasingly open world, they want a Europe with a greater presence and better quality. Our fellow-citizens want Europe to be able to create growth and employment and in that way protect their social model. They want Europe to have a proper research and development policy equal to that of the United States. They want Europe to guarantee their security. They want Europe to set an example in environmental matters. They long for this Europe to do a better job of fostering their identities, their differences, their languages, their cultures and their values. Finally, our fellow citizens want Europe to carry weight in the world because they know that the world’s balance will be different depending on whether Europe exists or not.

This political union that we so much want to see will only truly exist if it has a consistent budget commensurate with its new ambitions. That, Mr President-designate, will be a very clear way of measuring the new Commission’s European commitment. Will you give way to the simplistic and restrictive vision of some Member States, or will you be able to convince them that a substantial increase in the budget is absolutely essential?

The second issue is the building of a genuine European democracy without which there can be no political union. Europe can no longer be for initiates, governments and experts alone. The peoples of Europe, the citizens, no longer want decisions to be taken without them. They need to understand, to be informed, to be involved and to know how they can influence their own destiny. I am thinking here, for example, of the decision the Commission will have to take on the opening of future accession negotiations. This crucial question has a bearing on the very nature of Europe and we therefore need to come out from behind the customary closed doors and hold a genuine debate.

Mr President-designate, the issues at stake, like the expectations, are immense and time is pressing, because the peoples of Europe will be called upon to vote on the European Constitution in the next two years. We must not, we cannot, disappoint them any more. That is our duty and our responsibility. That is why, if our Parliament decides to give you its confidence, we will be asking you to sound these two messages loud and clear: that political unity is essential for Europe and that democracy will at last give our fellow citizens their rightful place.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Joan i Marí (Verts/ALE). Mr President, congratulations on your election. Mr Barroso, please give the Catalans a chance to vote 'yes' to the European Constitution. The Catalan people have not been recognised by Spain. Our language is not official in the Spanish state, and that state does not recognise our right to self-determination. We are European autonomists: we want the same degree of autonomy for the Catalan countries as Portugal has within Europe.

While we wait for our rights to be recognised, however, we would be able to vote in favour of the European Constitution if the Catalan language were to be officially recognised. If it is not, how can we vote in favour of a text that does not recognise the stateless nations - the Catalan countries, in our case - nor gives official status to a language such as Catalan, which is spoken by 10 million people? We would like to see a Europe made up of all its real people, a Europe which is equal as regards rights, including national rights for stateless nations, a Europe which is fully democratic or, as we say in Catalan: ...

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  President. I would like to point out to the House that the honourable Member has exercised his right laid down in Rule 138 of the Rules of Procedure to speak in the official language of his choice. English is an official language, and he has chosen to use it interspersed with phrases in Catalan, which could not be translated and understood by the rest of the House, and they will not therefore be recorded in the Minutes.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Figueiredo (GUE/NGL). (PT) The results and the low turnout in the recent elections to the European Parliament demonstrated that there is enormous dissatisfaction with, and alienation from, the Community policies and moves towards integration enshrined in the European Constitution. No one wants to admit that a policy of indifference continues to be pursued in the face of the worsening economic and social situation, turning a blind eye to high levels of unemployment, poverty and social exclusion and an increase in social inequity, and a deaf ear to the protests of workers threatened by relocation and restructuring by multinationals. We cannot ignore the situation in the Middle East, in Iraq and in Palestine, and the consequences of an absurd, illegal and unjust war, nor can we maintain a policy of following in the wake of the Bush administration's American imperialism or maintain an ambiguous attitude towards Sharon and his state terrorism. We cannot accept that the candidate for the position of President of the Commission, Dr Durão Barroso, should be telling us to expect more of the same, despite the fact that we now have ten more Member States in a difficult economic and social situation, which means that we should be giving priority to social issues, and to an in-depth review of our economic and social policies, paying particular attention to the new Financial Perspectives and to a significant strengthening of them. The formula that he is proposing continues to be based on the Lisbon strategy, but the only decisions taken there that have elicited a positive response have been liberalisation and privatisation. It is unacceptable that in the name of so-called competitiveness emphasis should be placed on flexible and precarious working arrangements, on reducing wage costs and on wage moderation, on attacking public services, in short on the neo-liberal agenda of economic and financial groups, instead of focusing on living and working conditions, on sustainable development, on greater economic, social and territorial cohesion, on high-quality jobs combined with full rights, and on restoring public and social investment, particularly in the railways, health services, the environment, education and research. This requires a review of economic and monetary policies, a halt to liberalisation, and a review of the Stability Pact, failing which we cannot fight poverty and ensure social inclusion and a high quality of life for the entire population. This implies revisiting the Commission's mandate within the World Trade Organisation to defend fair trade, food sovereignty, European industry and jobs in particularly vulnerable areas, and in particular sensitive traditional sectors such as textiles, glass-making, the extractive industries and shipbuilding, which involves giving dignity to workers, adopting measures to promote equal rights and opportunities, and placing welfare, social progress, stronger democracy, cooperation and peace at the heart of decision-making on Community policies. That is why we shall be voting against Dr Durão Barroso tomorrow, which will also represent a vote against the policies that he has presented to us here.

 
  
  

IN THE CHAIR: MRS ROTH-BEHRENDT
Vice-President

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Gollnisch (NI). (FR) Madam President, I will be very brief. After Mr Joan i Marí had spoken just now, the President said that Catalan was not an official language of the institutions. I do not believe that is correct. Catalan is in fact an official language, but not, it is true, a working language.

That being the case, I crave indulgence for the honourable Member who spoke a few sentences in Catalan, since I myself spoke in Latin in this very House during the debate in which it was decided that Catalan would be an official language; Latin is neither an official language nor a working language but my words did nevertheless appear in Latin in the Minutes.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  President. The President was in fact right that Catalan, like Sorbian, a language spoken close to my Berlin constituency, is not an official language, neither an official language of the European Union nor a working language. We can however work on getting minority languages made official languages so long as we provide the necessary capacities.

Mr Poettering would be willing to agree to my home city’s Berlin dialect as an official language. Thank you very much for that.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Vaidere (UEN). (LV) Ladies and gentlemen, coming under a crossfire of questions from our political group, Mr Barosso proved himself to be an experienced and business-like politician and we decided to support his candidacy, in particular, because Mr Barosso referred to the European Union as a union of nations. Mr Barosso, however, diplomatically avoided answering a question on his attitude towards future relations with Russia. I should like to emphasise that it is an important international goal to obtain international recognition and condemnation of the occupation of the Baltic States, including Latvia, in particular from Russia as heir to the USSR. Undoubtedly, this would make relations between the European Union and Russia, and also with the European Commission, less hypocritical – to talk about vodka and caviar in the evening, but the following morning, to realise that Russia has banned imports of food from the European Union. The admission of reality would make a good foundation for truly constructive cooperation in the future. When talking about economic aspects, I shall emphasise that when drawing up the budget a larger proportion of resources should be targeted at developing the economy of the new Member States – also by means of the Structural Funds, as the differences between the old and new Member States are still too great. Both tax levers, which are within the competency of the Member States, and Structural Funds for the infrastructure, elimination of poverty and support for economic development, should be used to speed up development. Mr Barosso, we place great hope on your creative approach towards these important questions. Thank you.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Martin, Hans-Peter (NI). (PT) First of all, I would like to say well done Portugal, congratulations on your football team. There is no doubt that your players were the best in Euro 2004. Nevertheless, they did not win. Unfortunately, at this point you are not the best player in the political game, but you are going to win. We know that the world is not fair.

 
  
  

(DE) The question is however, if you win, Mr future President, what will you do with that victory? We can always hope. I think the decisive question I would have to ask you is how you can close the great credibility gap between how so many people perceive political Europe and what actually happens here.

We do indeed want a common Europe, but it is not working. You can see that in the electoral turnout. You can see it in the unwillingness to make the necessary financial contributions. I think your central approach should be to go out of your way to say that we are wasting much too much here, that half the expenditure combined with the necessary efficiency could often achieve more and that in the matter of transparency in particular we could learn from the country you so much like to talk about, the US with its Freedom of Information Act; because we learn one thing here very quickly: there is no democracy without transparency, and that is why I hope that after your period of office we will again be able to say: ‘Come on, Portugal!’

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Pinheiro, João de Deus (PPE-DE). – (PT) Dr Durão Barroso, just as in other speeches you have made to this House, your message today was one of fresh hope. In your address you managed to touch upon issues such as terrorism, environmental degradation, an ageing population, regional and social asymmetry, the problem of long-term unemployment, the alienation of the public from the European project and issues relating to the approval of the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon strategy. You also referred, by omission, to the feebleness of our Common Foreign and Security Policy, and were also wise enough to mention the serious problems we are going to have to confront as regards the diversity and complexity of a Europe of 25, and before long one of 27 or 28. It is against this background that it is essential to nurture the idea that it is possible, in the face of all these challenges, to achieve consensus, to establish dialogue and to build bridges, and to do so without dogmatism or prejudice, while making available to everyone, rich or poor, large or small, new or old, the option of helping us to define relevant parameters and objectives for Europe. I would quite simply say that we need a Delors-style Commission, a Commission with leadership and ambition, but also an effective Commission.

Dr Durão Barroso, weak people do not go down in history – they never have done. I know your qualities, I know what you are capable of, and I know your determination, your common sense and your moderation. Combined with your youth and your love of parliamentary debate, I am convinced that your term of office will usher in a new era in Europe, and a new partnership between Parliament and the Commission that is vital if Europe is to move forward, to carry on building and to assert itself. I therefore have a question for you: I would like you to tell us in greater detail about your ideas for a relationship between a strong Commission and a European Parliament that we also wish to see becoming ever stronger.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Wiersma (PSE).(NL) Sorry, Mr President, for the confusion, but there are a lot of new people in the new Parliament. Congratulations to you on your election as Vice-President and on promptly serving as President in this important debate today. Mr Barroso, I want to focus on one subject, that being foreign and security policy. The chairman of my group has already tabled a number of questions for you, and that was one of them. We take the view that the European Commission of the future can make an important contribution to the further development of a strong European foreign policy with its own emphases. It is possible by combining the powers available to the Commission with those of the Council, and then the High Representative and the President of the Commission can of course play an important part in that. We want a more ambitious European Union. Security policy is an important component of that, and so, as we see it, it can never be a mere copy of the American model, which we would describe as military supremacy. In our understanding of these things, the European countries represent another tradition, and we advocate a broad-based security policy with a preference for civilian means, with military means always the option of last resort, and then only on the basis of decisions by the European Union. In the context of a broader security policy, we want to advocate development, support to developing countries, fair trade and tackling not only insecurity, but also its causes. We see conflict prevention as being as much a key concept as multilateralism. On that basis, the EU must dare make its own choices, whether in relation to Kyoto, to the International Criminal Court, or to dealing with the proliferation of nuclear weapons. If at all possible, this must take place in cooperation with the United States, and we do not underestimate the value of real cooperation, but, when there is no other choice, we must act alone. I now come to what might be called the heart of the debate and to what is still a live issue for us in the Group of the Party of European Socialists; the President-designate of the Commission has not been able to convince us that he too is thinking in terms of a similar autonomous role for the European Union. The overwhelming majority of the Socialist Group was opposed to the war in Iraq. It subsequently appeared that the resolution to wage it was founded upon errors or incomplete information concerning weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or Iraq’s links with Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups, and we can still read a lot about that from day to day in the newspapers and elsewhere. Nor was there any UN mandate, and we saw that as an important point. It has since become apparent that an immense amount of pain was involved in bringing Iraq to heel. We have also said what needed to be said about that over the past six months. Mr Barroso, as Prime Minister of Portugal, played a major role by organising and hosting a summit in the Azores, thus giving the impression that he identified himself with the Americans’ approach, which we regard as unilateralist. At no time since has he distanced himself from this. The question is whether he, on being faced with the same decision, would react in the same way, and whether that is his essential and fundamental conviction. This whole issue weighs heavily on the Group of the Party of European Socialists and will play an important part in the deliberations that we are going to conclude tonight. In dialogue with the Socialist Group, Mr Barroso drew attention to other European prime ministers who had also supported the American policy; it is of course relevant when assessing a candidate that politicians once pursued a policy, but his former fellow-prime ministers are not standing as president of the European Commission. I hope he will understand that we want a President who can at least empathise with us in our views of the security policy for the European Union.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maaten (ALDE).(NL) Mr President, I too congratulate you on your election as a Vice-President of this Parliament. Mr Barroso, you are a candidate for the position of President of the Commission, and, should you take up that position, your presidency does of course come at a very tricky time. At the European elections, over half the voters stayed at home, and some of those who did go to the polls voted for parties that are critical of Europe or hostile to it. What the voters are telling us, telling Parliament, the Council and the Commission, is that things cannot go on any longer the way they are. The European Union cannot go on if it keeps on working the way it does now. There is a massive crisis of confidence, and the last thing we can allow ourselves is to pass to the order of the day. It is also for those reasons that we have so many criticisms of the procedure that has been adopted. That has absolutely nothing to do with you personally – on the contrary, what speaks in your favour is the unanimous support you have gained – but the procedure is not consistent with the image that we in Europe must portray. In this, you are not the problem, but you could turn out to be the solution. You could well, indeed, concede that things cannot go on the way they are, and that we have to find another way of doing our work. We have to present a different image to the one we are currently showing the outside world. The question is whether you will carry on in the same way. I might add, by the way, that I am assuming you are not, partly on the basis of what you said earlier, but will you be carrying on with the backroom deals, with decisions taken by ministers in ‘old boy network’ style, or will you, like the public, say, ‘it cannot, indeed, go on this way’?

A second question is whether we should rely on your words or your actions. In what you say, there is now ‘something for everyone’, and I can well imagine that playing well for a candidate. I have great respect for your actions; the sort of economic policy you operate – or operated – in Portugal is the sort that the EU needs. I differ from the previous speaker in believing that your foreign policy is outstanding; these are things that we have need of. I hope that your deeds are more to be relied on than your words.

Yet another question by way of conclusion: you talked about getting more women into the Commission, and I see that as a very good line to take. What interests me primarily, as a Dutch liberal, is what you do when a country has a good woman candidate; do you then tell the Member State that it has to be the woman, that they may perhaps have perfectly good male candidates, but the woman must get the job? Will you push this through, even when the country in question currently occupies the presidency of the Union?

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Lundgren (IND/DEM). (SV) Madam President, in the elections to the European Parliament in June, the turn-out was very low, and Eurosceptic parties had significant successes. Opinion polls show that people’s confidence in the EU and its institutions is declining in the majority of Member States. The legitimacy of the European Union is being progressively undermined. Why is that the case?

There are two important explanations. Firstly, the way in which the EU is developing means that political power is receding ever further from the people. Secondly, people increasingly believe that EU resources are being lost through wastefulness and corruption. The new Swedish party, the June List, which I represent, stood for election on both these issues, and we have been given a powerful political mandate to combat the continued transfer of political power from the Member States to Brussels and to help ensure that European taxpayers’ money is used efficiently and honourably.

The Commission must stop continually going into new areas. We do not want doctors’ working hours to be regulated at EU level. We do not want hunting policy to be worked out at EU level. We do not want a common tax policy or social policy. The ongoing centralisation and bureaucratisation of political power is in actual fact a threat to the future of Europe. Europe’s fantastic economic, scientific and social successes have in large part come about through institutional competition between small political units seeking constructive solutions to issues.

The cradle of Europe was in Ancient Greece with its small city states. Northern Italy’s independent city states during the Renaissance and the host of German states during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries provided European history with periods of greatness. The Industrial Revolution was begun in an England of only some tens of millions of inhabitants.

The June List calls upon the Commission President to make the term of office that has now begun into an era of political decentralisation in which the institutions of the EU are cleaned up and made more efficient.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Mussolini (NI). (IT) Mr President, I would like to congratulate the candidate, Mr Barroso. You said that we, the 732 MEPs, are the voice of the people and then you said that unless we are a member of a group, we will have little opportunity to speak. This is highly undemocratic.

I would like to say that I very much welcomed certain parts of your intervention, particularly those relating to fighting discrimination and promoting equal opportunities. I also heard someone say that the Council must not be the Commission’s doormat and that the Commission and Parliament must not be the Council’s doormat. I, on the other hand, am keen to ensure that Europe is not the United States’ doormat. This is the most important thing as, up till now, that has been the case. We need to strengthen Europe’s political role, just as we need to strengthen the Christian values which unite us in Europe and fight for those social issues which, in my view, are the most important. We hear little about childhood and very little about children who are exploited, raped and used as child soldiers in wars.

I will therefore welcome any action you take regarding these decisions and, in particular, regarding these social issues.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Grossetête (PPE-DE). (FR) Madam President, may I first of all say what a pleasure it is to see you sitting on the platform opposite me and congratulate you on your election.

Mr Barroso, I listened carefully to what you had to say and I appreciate your vision of Europe and of the part to be played by the Commission, a Commission that must be strong and needs some younger blood. I think you will be able to give a new image to this institution, which is not always well perceived by our fellow citizens; they want to be kept informed about the Community’s work and have the prospects and challenges we face clearly explained.

The next five years will be full of challenges. I will mention only four: the approval of the Constitution, the financial guidelines, employment policy and the legitimate questions that arise concerning the accession of Turkey.

An unwavering commitment to the draft Constitution would be of great assistance to the Member States and their representatives who will have the enormous responsibility of presenting the draft to their fellow citizens with a view to getting their support for the text of the Constitution. A Europe that works is a Europe which may perhaps do less, but which does a lot better, it is a Europe that makes progress, a Europe that knows how to manage its budget and that spends effectively, providing itself with the resources it needs for its policies. There would be no point in proposing guidelines without first thinking of the cost, nor in freezing essential items of expenditure. Without penalising the old Member States, the budget must allow us to support the ten new countries and help to create the conditions for growth. We are counting on you to preserve Europe’s regional policy.

At the same time, the European Commission will have to revitalise economic policy. Such economic revitalisation cannot be based on inflexible instruments that lock the States in accounting straightjackets or trap European firms in rules that prevent them from developing on the world market. Our policies must be capable of adapting to the requirements of current economic conditions. If the Union is to be successful in this, it must have the support of its peoples, who want it to be easier to understand what the Community does. Unfortunately, they have the impression that everything is decided without consulting them. Turkish accession is a case in point. They think it has all been decided in advance. I cannot believe that. There must be open debate; our fellow citizens want to be directly involved.

I would also like the new Commission to pay attention to youth, that dynamic and optimistic youth that is profoundly European. The young people of today will be the Europe of tomorrow. We are living today in a world where everything moves very quickly, where the new generations are impatient and where definite results must be visible in the short term.

Mr Barroso, I wish you success not only for tomorrow but especially for five years at the head of the Commission. Stand up to the Council; it is often the Council that brings Europe to a standstill. Put your trust in the European Parliament. Parliament will be your ally if you know how to navigate while respecting our fellow citizens’ wishes.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Barón Crespo (PSE).(ES) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Durão Barroso, on the long march towards European integration, you are appearing before this House to request the opportunity to lead its next phase.

You chose to begin your speech with an apt quote from Jean Monnet in which he speaks of the stimulating nature of the creation of this supranational democracy we are building together and I welcome his courage and bravery.

I am not sure whether you have received a poisoned chalice, but you have taken a step forward in the Agramante’s camp still present in the Council, after several people have fallen victim during a debate which has taken place behind closed doors. You have taken that step and are appearing today. I therefore believe it is an important step. And I must make a few comments in relation to it – and I do not address this just to you, but also to the members of the PPE-DE coalition – because we are innovating politically and constitutionally.

Mr Poettering has repeatedly demanded, by means of vetoes, his political family’s right, as the largest minority – that coalition is a minority, but is the largest European minority – to propose a candidate. You have achieved that. We are now in another political phase. Now you must win a majority in this Parliament and that is the task you are embarking on now.

I must say to you that we are carrying out an important exercise and, to put it in terms we Iberians will understand, you are asking us today for an opportunity. It remains to be seen whether you deserve it or are given it. But please allow me to express some of the reservations we Socialists have and which I have made public, and which I have discussed with some common friends.

Firstly, you preside over a social democratic party which has been part of, firstly, the Liberal Group, and then the PPE-DE Group in this House. You have never knocked at the door of the social democratic Socialist Group. I am not defending any ‘copyright’, but you will appreciate that this creates a degree of disorientation. You have also made a brief reference to the Lisbon strategy which was approved under the Portuguese Presidency in May 2000, with Antonio Guterres as President. You will agree with me, in view of what has happened in Portugal and in view of what Mr Bolkenende has said this morning, that the great question we are facing is how to interpret the Lisbon strategy.

We want a highly competitive economy with technological development, but we also want cohesion and to defend and update our social model. In that regard we are not in agreement, given what you have done in Portugal.

I therefore believe that you are now appearing to request an opportunity, and we Socialists will debate today whether we believe it is appropriate to offer it to you. However, in any event, the process will not end today. You will continue to be a candidate until the new Commission is proposed to us, until all the hearings of all the Commissioners take place and until a programme is presented to this House, with an investiture debate, in October. And that is the way it works.

Perhaps you will be given the opportunity, but you must be able to build a majority and the Socialist Group is absolutely essential to that majority.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Golik (NI). (PL) Madam President, I would like to begin by congratulating you on your appointment. Mr President-designate of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, at the end of June the people of Poland and members of our party were delighted to learn that you, Mr Barroso, had agreed to stand as candidate for President of the European Commission. We are glad to have you with us in the House today and to be able to cast our votes for you.

In the European Parliament I represent Poland and my constituents. In Poland, I represent a group of several hundred thousand mainly small and medium-sized enterprises in my capacity as Deputy Chairman of the National Chamber of Commerce, a position I have held for some time. Over the years there has been much discussion amongst entrepreneurs in Poland and in Europe on the variety of ways in which Chambers of Trade and Industry operate. Ultimately they operate either on a voluntary or on a compulsory basis, and require a more important role within the structure of the state and the economy. The Lisbon Strategy calls on the European Union to increase its competitiveness. It urges the Union to make use of all available means to that end. This is particularly relevant when competing with the economy of the United States, where business associations are very important and receive the support they need.

We believe the Chambers of Commerce and Industry are assets that could be better utilised. They have been firmly established in Europe since Napoleonic times. I would therefore ask that you, Mr Barroso, pay particular attention to this area during your term of office. I hope too that insofar as you are able you will ensure that more resources and tasks are allocated by European Union institutions to Chambers of Commerce and Industry. The Chambers will then be able to play their rightful part as recipients of Union funds and in fulfilling the tasks of the Lisbon Strategy.

We wish you every success in all areas of your new role, Mr Barroso. We trust you will devote particular attention to institutions bringing entrepreneurs together. Finally, whenever you receive complaints about the shortage of pilots, do remember that Poland produces excellent navigators.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Mayor Oreja (PPE-DE). (ES) Madam President, Mr Durão Barroso, I would like to start by congratulating Mr Durão Barroso on the content of the communication this afternoon and I would like to express my satisfaction at the fact that he is the candidate proposed as President of the European Commission.

You have put it quite rightly. This is not just any old moment, these are not normal circumstances, it is not just any old Commission you are going to lead over the coming years and there are at least three reasons for such an unusual situation.

The first reason is enlargement – I am not sure we appreciate that this will be the first Commission since enlargement. The second reason is that five years ago, when the mandate of the previous Commission began, the horrendous terrorist attacks of 11 September, and those of 11 March in Madrid, had not yet taken place. And, thirdly, because these events have been accompanied by a drop in turnout at the European elections.

Possibly, for these three reasons, in colloquial terms, we should take a break in our journey. But in politics there are no breaks and in the European Union we cannot take any break or stop. But that break must be replaced by reflection more profound than ever and which, at the same time, allows us to aim higher than ever, when it comes to dealing with the future of the European Union.

This afternoon, I believe there is a conclusion we all agree on: we have all said we must strengthen the European institutions and have all emphasised in particular that we must strengthen the Commission. We all agree on this. The question is how we can strengthen the Commission further. You have also put it very well: it is not a question of the Commission having lots of powers, but of it being able to lead, guide, organise and establish priorities.

I am left with two of the key issues you have pointed out this afternoon: firstly, that the Commission, above all, has to be able to lead, guide and organise the work of the Ministers of the nations making up the European Union; secondly, that there will be no foreign policy for the European Union unless we first have a solid internal policy able to deal with the common problems we Europeans share.

The question for tomorrow, therefore, is: how will we strengthen the Commission? By strengthening or castigating the President of the Commission, through our vote? I have no doubt that the strengthening of the Commission demands that the President of the Commission can count on the full support of the whole of this House and, for this reason, when we vote tomorrow on the appointment of this candidate, I would ask that, over and above personal considerations and ideological issues, we think of institutional stability.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Napoletano (PSE). (IT) President-Designate, during the hearing before the Group of the Party of European Socialists, in reply to my question on foreign policy and, in particular, on the circumstances which led to your support for the decision in favour of unilateral intervention in Iraq, you said that, being a politician and not a technocrat, you had to give an opinion and take a stand at that time.

This means that, with your candidacy, you wish to help politicise the political life of Europe. You strongly and repeatedly stressed this notion, including today. Nevertheless, I am afraid that this was not the reasoning which led and motivated the governments to nominate you, because you well know that politics presupposes the development of a dialectic, with the citizens then being in a position to understand the alternatives and to assess the differences between positions, particularly when they concern fundamental issues such as war and peace. This is also why many younger generations are staying away from the ballot boxes, as they do not properly understand the alternatives that politics offers them.

The matter I wish to raise with you today, however, is different and just as important. You will be aware that, on 22 April this year, Parliament adopted a resolution on the risk of a breach of the freedom of information in the European Union, and in particular in Italy. Following that vote, there has been a continued trend for media concentration in France and the accession countries, while in Italy a law on conflict of interests has been adopted which leaves control of television stations in the hands of the Prime Minister. Instead, the European Parliament hoped to see the introduction of legal instruments which would prohibit political figures or candidates from holding direct interests in the information sector. Moreover, there was the terrible news a few days ago of the two journalists killed in Russia, and you know how serious the issue of freedom of the press is in countries with which we have international relations.

Mr Barroso, I therefore have a very specific question, and I hope that your reply will be just as clear. Do you intend to act on the European Parliament’s request, that is, undertake to produce a draft directive on the protection of media pluralism? Having said that you wish to give importance, prestige and autonomy to the Commission with respect to the Council and in partnership with Parliament, do you think that you can make this commitment now? If you receive a positive vote from this House tomorrow, will this matter be included in the programme that you will put forward in October?

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ferber (PPE-DE). (DE) Madam President, Candidate for the Commission Presidency, ladies and gentlemen, what is at stake with tomorrow’s vote? As many have already said, tomorrow is about our trust. It is a vote of confidence. Do we have the confidence that the Council’s candidate will be up to the tasks that await us in the next five years? Do we trust him to play his part correctly as guardian of the Treaties amid the constant tension between Council, Parliament and Commission? I would like to say loud and clear that I trust the candidate and I am sure that a majority in this House will be able to place the same justified confidence in him.

At the same time, I would like to point out, however, that the issue is also that this confidence must not be abused. Is the candidate capable of maintaining his independence when it comes to putting his team together? I do not think it is acceptable that there are and were Member States who made their assent to you, Mr Barroso, conditional on having particular wishes granted in the allocation of Commission portfolios, but I am confident that you are independent enough for that not to happen automatically. You have said as much very clearly today.

We are now entering a period where we will no longer be in a permanent Intergovernmental Conference but where we shall have to bring this European idea to life politically. Over the next few months, we will of course have to draw up the work programme together. In that connection, I hope that you and the European Parliament will cooperate closely and there, too, I am confident that you will make that cooperation a success, because we will have a lot of questions to answer together.

Subsidiarity: how can we bring this concept to life, how can we ensure that rules are only created where Europe is really involved and that in all other cases the Member States, regions and local authorities can continue to act as they think fit? How can we help to make Europe more competitive? There, too, I would ask you, when you are in office in the Commission, to give some thought to whether there are not proposals from the old Commission that deserve to be withdrawn. The policy on chemicals, for example. It does not fit in with the Lisbon process of ‘increasing competitiveness’ and surely needs to be rethought. I might mention the Budget Regulation. We are suffering because we are no longer able to do what the legislator, Parliament and Council, decide in the budget because the Budget Regulation, the Commission, puts so many shackles on us in the administration that the legislator’s intentions can no longer be carried out. We are looking to you for initiatives here and I therefore hope that you will not abuse this trust, but that together we will be able to ensure that Europe makes progress in the next five years and will therefore in five years’ time, too, regain the citizens’ confidence.

 
  
  

IN THE CHAIR: MR FRIEDRICH
Vice-President

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Poignant (PSE). (FR) Mr Prime Minister, no one has called you that yet! It is not easy to know how to address you: candidate, President-designate, Mr Barroso... your designation makes the status of your presence itself something of a problem and a cause of some embarrassment.

You said to us: ‘appoint me this week and you will have my programme next year.’ It is always difficult for a Member of Parliament to adjust. However, I appreciated your reference to voters who did not go to the ballot box. You in fact told us that although we represent 450 million people, we were elected by 150 million voters, while another 200 million stayed at home. What can they be thinking of today, after 50 years – although they have not all lived 50 years? What does Europe mean to them? It is a promise kept: we have created peace and democracy; the market has been achieved; some of them have the euro in their pockets.

Your problem and ours today is to give meaning to the future. I believe – as do others too – that the social issue is central. You mentioned it among many others. But if you do not give that question priority by feeding into it all the matters we have raised in our groups: public services, tax harmonisation, social rights, etc., there will not only be injustice, inequality and unemployment, but, more than that, our fellow citizens who have benefited from the achievements of the last 50 years will abandon the very idea of Europe. You have the duty to write a new page of our history. I confess I am still unsatisfied.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Titley (PSE). Mr President, as I believe most speakers agree, following the European elections Europe is on trial. We have to prove ourselves worthy of our citizens' support. We will not do that by talking endlessly about process or by having obscure institutional debates, nor by flowery speeches on the meaning of 'Europe'.

Now that we have agreement on a Constitutional Treaty, we have to focus on what Europe does rather than how Europe does it. We have to show how Europe can benefit all our citizens, so I want to see a President of the Commission who is a man of action, not a man of words or fine speeches.

The most important priority - and I recognise your commitment to that, Mr Barroso - has to be jobs. We must implement the recommendations of Mr Wim Kok. We must have incentives to create jobs. We must have policies that make work pay and we must spend money on training and retraining our workers, not on simply keeping them out of work. We must incorporate the most marginal into society. Europe needs all its citizens if it is to prosper. We have to invest in our people because we cannot have economic efficiency without social justice. We must also maintain the requirement to ensure that European laws are properly enforced across all Member States.

In the last Commission, Commissioner Kinnock did an excellent job on reforming the procedures of the Commission. I would hope that if you are selected as President, Mr Barroso, you will ensure that his work is continued and finished so that we have a modern, accountable Commission that guarantees that we have proper probity at all levels.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Costa, António (PSE). – (PT) My dear Dr José Manuel Barroso, I would like to wish you a warm welcome in our own language and in a cordial spirit that reflects the many years during which you and Portugal's Socialists have been adversaries. Your personal qualities are not of course at issue here. I know you well enough to say that you have the qualities needed to be President of the Commission and I am also sufficiently independently minded to say that quite openly. Nor is there any doubt about our pleasure in seeing one of our fellow countrymen occupying this post. Firstly, because other Portuguese citizens, such as Commissioner António Vitorino, could be in this position, and, secondly, because our shared duty in this House – our duty and yours – is to represent the common interests of Europe's citizens. What is at issue right now is your political programme for Europe, and where that is concerned, let us be clear that we differed with you as Prime Minister of Portugal on three fundamental and far-reaching issues: firstly, the war in Iraq; secondly the review of the Stability and Growth Pact; and thirdly the downgrading of the social dimension of the Lisbon agenda. I would accordingly like to ask you very directly in what way your programme as President of the Commission differs in these three areas from your practice as Prime Minister, in such a way as to justify our taking a different view of your programme now than we did of your actions then.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Itälä (PPE-DE).(FI) Mr President, Mr Barroso, we all know that the EU faces enormous challenges over this five-year term. We now need leadership and skill, more than anything, and I know that Mr Barroso represents these very things – leadership and skill. Above all, his election also highlights, in the proper manner, the result of the EU elections within the context of the EU’s democratic system. He also represents the small Member States and the peripheral regions, which is an excellent outward sign.

We nevertheless have to remember that our work – which is in the limelight – must be of an international nature, and not party- or institution-based. We must also continue the process of bringing the Union closer to its citizens. Above all else, the new Commission must make an effort to ensure that economic prosperity is increased, that new jobs are created and that competitiveness is improved, in accordance with the Lisbon Strategy. It is especially important today to raise the issue of the security of our citizens, and to make that part of the work of the Commission too. We need a strong, but above all, a functional Europe. With the election of Mr Barroso, this Parliament is showing the citizens of Europe that democracy can work in an enlarged EU, and that together, the institutions of the Union will be able to move forward.

Mr Barroso, the Finnish press has described the role of President of the European Commission as the hardest job in Europe or perhaps the entire world. This I am sure is true, but I know that you will carry it out with honour, and I wish you every success and hope you will have patience and new ideas when facing the tough challenges that lie ahead. I am sure that tomorrow this House will give you its fullest support.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Cesa (PPE-DE). (IT) Mr President, President-Designate of the European Commission, ladies and gentlemen, it is a great honour for me, a new Member of this House, to take the floor today in such an important debate in my capacity as Vice-Chairman of the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats.

President-Designate, the Europe that you described is based on a balance between integration and intergovernmental dialogue and I welcome and endorse your view. In fact, you will be at the helm of a Europe which needs a policy centred on the balance between national and supranational authorities, capable of intervening effectively in multilateral fora and in distant locations within an enlarged Europe. Mr Barroso, I am sure that you will be able to merge the interests of small and large countries, while also preserving an essential Mediterranean dimension to Europe’s identity.

Furthermore, we appreciated your ability to anchor the process of integration to our common Atlantic identity. From global security to economic policy and the Middle East, the interests we have in common with our Atlantic partner cannot be forgotten.

Mr Barroso, the Union which you wish to help consolidate is enshrined in the European Constitution, and it would have been fully enshrined if we had included an undeniable fact, that is, that the main unifying element lies in Europe’s Christian roots. We will never tire of saying this. Europe, however, must also devote itself to reforming decision-making processes and the institutions. The pace of the economy in the globalised society requires this. The European Constitution is already a move in this direction but, pending ratification by the Member States, we cannot and must not stand idly by.

Parliament, the Council and the Commission recently adopted an important interinstitutional agreement called ‘Better Lawmaking’ which, if fully implemented, will be able, among other things, to make dialogue between the institutions easier and more transparent and avoid pointless legislation, by making the most of alternative instruments such as self-regulation and co-regulation and setting definite timeframes for the transposition of legislation by the Member States. It is also an agreement which should guarantee Parliament’s rights.

President-Designate, I am certain that the Commission you are to preside over will also play its full part in implementing the interinstitutional agreement. To do so, it must constitute a strong team capable of being enterprising and independent. Mr Barroso, a difficult, but important job awaits you. We would like to extend our best wishes for your work and assure you that you can count on our strong, loyal support.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Dehaene (PPE-DE).(NL) Mr President, I think that the proposed President of the Commission is very much aware that the next Commission faces major challenges, not the least of which is enlargement by the addition of ten new countries and the need to integrate them into the EU. There are those who fear that this might lead to it being diluted. That really does not have to be the case; the Constitution, as worked out by us in the Convention, aims to avoid that very thing, for example by reinforcing the Community method. It is above all the Commission that has to prove the value of the Constitution we await, for it plays a quite central role in it. It is the guardian of the Treaties; it has to defend Europe’s general interest. I myself have always said in the Convention, and everyone has heard me say it, that the Commission, in its present form, is too large to be able to function in a truly collegial way. On the other hand, I believe that, if the Commission really does want to function with 25 members, it can do so only with a strong Presidency that uses all the prerogatives given to it by the Treaty. Although I was glad to hear that you plan to do this in the composition of the Commission from the word go, I do think that the Council will exercise overall control over this and that Parliament, too, the authority of which you emphasised from the word go, will defend the independence of the Commission and the full authority of its President.

You should also stress this in relation to the financial package. I do indeed think that, in wanting to make enlargement real, we must play up solidarity between the EU’s countries and within the EU for all it is worth. This cannot be done if we want to remain within too tight-fisted a framework; for example, the 1% limit is an impossible framework within which to really realise enlargement in the form of integration. Take it from me, Mr President: I see the adoption of the Constitution as one of the priorities for the years ahead, one that we have to work on together. It also strikes me as important that the Commission, the new Commission, should, for a period, anticipate this constitution and the way in which transition to it may be simplified. In this, I am thinking primarily in terms of justice, internal security, and also of foreign policy, where we must indeed speak with one voice and to which the appointment of the Foreign Minister must contribute. I think it will be a help to you that it is now certain that this will be Javier Solana, and it seems to me important that there should be very good cooperation from the very outset.

 
  
  

(FR) With your permission, Mr Barroso, to conclude I will speak in a language which you understand better than my mother tongue in order to say this to you. If some people here have referred to you as being the second choice, remember that Jacques Delors was also a second choice, but that he was one of the best presidents we have had; that is what I wish for you.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Busuttil (PPE-DE). – (MT). – I would like to start by congratulating Mr Barroso for his nomination.

It is a great privilege for me to address this Parliament as one of the parliamentarians from Malta – the smallest Member State of the European Union – a country which, albeit the smallest, has already proved its European and Mediterranean vocation through its millenary history, and is now ready to continue its contribution as a member of the European Union.

It is equally an honour for me to speak in my mother tongue in this Institution – Maltese – which is the first official language of the European Union with Semitic roots. I have no doubt that Maltese and Gozitans feel proud to hear the Maltese language in this institution.

Now that the EU has welcomed ten new countries into its fold, it is necessary that one of our highest priorities should be that this enlargement is a success, and translates into benefits that can be seen by everyone and that everyone benefits from the enlargement. It would be a mistake to think that now that enlargement has occurred, everything will automatically fall into place. No. A great amount of work is required, and in particular a great deal of work is required from the European Commission so that above all, people understand what is going on and understand how they can obtain the best benefits from membership. How can people see the opportunities and grasp them if they have not yet understood enough about what the European Union means and how it could affect their lives?

People expect concrete results from us. They expect the creation of new jobs; they also expect a higher standard of living. And above all, they want us to speak to them and to be closer to them.

It is a big challenge, and we have a great responsibility laid upon us, both as parliamentarians and particularly as the European Commission over the coming five years. It is a big challenge, but it is one that I am convinced that we can overcome together. And for this reason, Mr Barroso, I hope that you will find approval from this Chamber tomorrow.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Kósáné Kovács (PSE).(HU) The Socialist Party of Hungary, a new member country, sent me to the European Parliament. I live in a region that has toiled and suffered for that democracy which has opened the gates of the European Parliament in front of us. We have learned in the past few years to use the same words for the European processes.

You, Mr Chairman, were very convincing, when you stressed the importance of competitiveness in the Lisbon process. We have endured that social transformation which has indeed split our society in two. It is therefore extremely important for us that the Lisbon solidarity and the host society and the chance of joining up should not just be expressed in nice words but become a political will, reinforced by social support. Your responsibility is extremely big, as it will depend on you whether this unified political will comes into being or the same words will be used again to hide empty intentions.

I am convinced that questions put to you by my sub-committee colleagues are also your own questions. This is why I would like to put this to you: ask yourself whether you want to and are able to convince the sceptics. Can you give hope to those who lost it? There are many of those in my region and in my country. If your answer is yes, then I would put it to you that the heart of Europe should not receive the new members only into its heart but also onto its shoulders.

 
  
  

IN THE CHAIR: MR BORRELL FONTELLES
President

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Barroso, President-designate of the Commission. (PT) Mr President, I will not be able to answer all the questions in just five minutes. I shall try to do that tomorrow in a more systematic way, but I would like to give you an idea at this point of my feelings about the questions that in some ways seem to me the most difficult and the most important. At the very least I would like to respond to those who have expressed reservations about my candidacy. Turning to Iraq, first and foremost, it is true that this issue divided us in Europe, that it created divisions between the countries of Europe and divisions within our countries, and even created divisions within the political families represented here. I believe that in the case of Portugal, if I may reply to Mr Costa's question, we succeeded to some extent in overcoming that division when our Parliament recently managed to approve the essence of a resolution to join forces in relation to the most recent United Nations resolution. I do not think it would be useful for Europe, or for the European Union project, for us to go back now and make hypothetical retrospective judgments or to say who was right. I believe that it is now important for us to be united in Europe, and not just on the basis of the resolution approved unanimously by the United Nations Security Council, because I believe that all of us in Europe have a fundamental interest in the stabilisation of Iraq, in seeing a truly independent Iraq, an Iraq at peace with itself and at peace within the region. If I am endorsed by the European Parliament as the President of the Commission, that is exactly what I shall do. Some honourable Members, however, link the issue of Iraq with other concerns, in particular relations between Europe and the United States, and European security and defence policy, to which I am firmly committed.

Firstly, as regards our relations with the United States, I would like to say that it is possible to be pro-European, as I am myself, and still advocate good transatlantic relations. I believe that those good relations are in our interest, in the interest of Europe, but I also think that they are in the interest of the world, taking a global view, and considering the enormous challenges we face at world level, in particular terrorism, the threats to the environment, the great epidemics and underdevelopment, none of which can be overcome by Europe alone. Europe alone is not enough. We need to take our key partners with us in a constructive way, including of course the United States of America. But I would like to make it clear that I am a European, that I am Portuguese and very honoured to be a European. If I am elected President of the Commission I will defend the general interests of Europe and the common good of Europe, and I will not accept Europe being treated as a second-rate power in any area whatsoever. I do not want there to be any doubt about that.

The third question relates to our concept of a common security and defence policy. In that context, I would like to explain that I still advocate today what I advocated before I became a candidate for the position of President of the Commission. I believe that it is helpful and necessary for us to build a common security and defence identity for Europe. I believe that is important and it was for that reason that as Prime Minister I advocated each and every step towards strengthening that European unity. What is more, as Minister for Foreign Affairs, I had the honour of signing some of the instruments through which Portugal committed itself to building that very same identity, and in particular our membership of Eurofor and of Euromarfor, which represented the first steps my country took towards actively participating in a common security and defence identity.

The second question is about the role of the Commission, Parliament and the European Council. In this respect, I would like to repeat what I wrote and said before I was in this position. I have always defended the role of the Commission as a supranational institution, and as a truly communitarian institution. At the Intergovernmental Conference, the approaches I advocated involved giving greater independence and credibility to the Commission. At that time I did not know and could not even imagine that I would find myself in this position, but I believed then and continue to believe now that the Community method is essential. Now more than ever, with 25 Member States and 27, 28 or even more in the future, if we start to work in a purely intergovernmental way – and I am weighing my words carefully, but I shall say this nevertheless – it could spell the end of the European Union. If we adopt a purely intergovernmental approach, that is what could happen. We could end up with a group-based approach, with the Balkanisation of groups in the European Union, pitching the stronger against the weaker, the richer against the poorer, the centre against the remoter regions, and the large against the small. The only solution is to adopt the Community method advocated by the founding fathers of the European Union – Jean Monnet, Robert Schuman, Konrad Adenauer, Alcide de Gasperi, Paul Henri Spaak, and many others. That is why I said in my speech that although we are not going to change values, we can change our approach to implementing those values. The Community method and the role of the Commission are accordingly essential and I therefore believe that the positive partnership between the Commission and the European Parliament that I mentioned earlier is important.

One eminent Member, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, advocated that Members should punish the Council, and should ‘shoot down’ its candidate for President of the Commission. I wish to say that if you want to punish the Council, Mr Cohn-Bendit, there are other far more practical and less painful ways of doing it than to punish me. There are many other opportunities to do it in this Parliament. However, the Commission could be your ally, Parliament's ally, and I have already said that I shall do everything to ensure that is the case, while respecting the competences of each institution. I have tried here today to demonstrate my respect for Parliament, just as I did during the hearings held with all the political groups. I also tried to do that in my own country in relation to the Assembly of the Republic, our national parliament. I can promise you faithful adherence to the principles of transparency mentioned here by various Members, among others by the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe. I therefore believe that if I am elected we should forge a dynamic alliance between those at the forefront of the European project. That is why I said that, although my party of course has the honour of belonging to one political family, I believe that the President of the Commission should not be the President for one political group, but that he should seek a consensus between all those who essentially share a belief in the same European project. I can discern the same European conviction here in the various political families, be it the Socialists or the Liberals and Democrats, the PPE-DE family or other honourable Members.

That is why, in response to some members of the Socialist Group and also of the Liberal Group, I wish to say that my approach is not a dogmatic one, nor is it a factional one. I believe that I demonstrated that when I was the only Head of Government who supported a Socialist politician as candidate for President of the Commission, and I did that because I was convinced that he was a good candidate for the job. What better proof could you have of a non-dogmatic and a non-factional spirit? If I am elected I shall work with the various political families, but of course more so with those who believe in the European project, and I shall conclude by making the following request: please do not caricature my position on social issues. As Prime Minister, I had to act in accordance with what I considered to be most urgent, but what one considers most urgent is not necessarily what is most important. In my order of priorities, social and cultural issues come ahead of economic ones. But I once said that if we are to achieve our objectives in terms of social justice, which I rank more highly than any others, then we need to take immediate economic and financial action. That is my vision for Europe. That is why I do not see the Lisbon Agenda simply as an agenda for competitiveness. Competitiveness is needed of course, but so are social cohesion and sustainable development, including environmental protection and a policy of European leadership in protecting the environment. That is why in presenting my agenda to you today for a partnership for Europe I spoke in general terms about three essential areas: prosperity, solidarity – on which I place particular emphasis – and security. I have in mind not only solidarity between the different regions, so as to respond to the needs of the new Member States, but also solidarity between the various social groups and classes, paying special attention to the most disadvantaged. That is my vision. I believe that it is possible to bring these components together. Let me repeat that I am a centrist reformer who wishes to work hand in hand with Parliament, and one who believes that Europe can be built with sufficient will. I need your support to give the Commission authority and credibility not to defend the Commission's own territory or indulge in institutional egotism, but because the Commission is the institution that represents the general interests of the European Union and the common good of Europe, and there is accordingly a natural communality of interest with the European Parliament, which is the voice of all Europe's citizens. If I win your confidence, that is the direction I undertake to work in.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  President. The debated is suspended. It will resume tomorrow at 9 a.m.(1)

(The sitting was closed at 6.10 p.m.)(2)

 
  

(1) Action taken on Parliament’s positions and resolutions – Communication of the proposals of the Conference of Presidents – Deadline for presentation of amendments: see Minutes.
(2) Agenda for the next meeting: see Minutes.

Legal notice - Privacy policy