Michael Gahler (PPE-DE). – (DE) Mr President, to be quite honest, I was somewhat surprised to find that the Berman report had already been drawn up and a proposal was being presented before the completion of the Mitchell report, the actual report that is to assess the experience gained with the DCI.

My fellow Member is right in terms of the substance of his proposal. Given the design of the DCI, the legislative gap was inevitable. I support the conclusion that a different instrument is needed to close this gap for non-ODA (Official Development Assistance) activities. I can conceive of both the alternatives he proposes in paragraph 3 of his report.

I should like to make it clear, however, that non-ODA actions are also relevant to a country’s development: it is only the choice of legal basis that is in dispute. In my opinion, it is the rapporteur and his committee against the rest of the world in this regard. The Committee on Development opts for a narrow interpretation of Article 179 and must therefore resort to articles intended for domestic policies as a legal basis. The Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Legal Affairs, Parliament’s Legal Service, the ECJ, the Council and the Commission all read Article 179 differently.

Therefore we, the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, decided today not to withdraw this motion tomorrow, but to table an amendment to change the legal basis envisaged, nor shall we be supporting the postponement, as we agree that only the legal basis is at issue in this matter. I am therefore sure that we will achieve clarity in the matter tomorrow.