Verbatim report of proceedings

Wednesday, 14 December 2011 - Strasbourg

5. Review of the Polish Presidency (debate)

  President. – The next item is the statements by the Council and the Commission to begin the debate on the review of the Polish Presidency.

I would like to give a very warm welcome to the Prime Minister of the Government of the Republic of Poland, who also heads the Presidency – the Presidency of the Council of the European Union – Mr Donald Tusk. Mr Tusk, to begin with, I would like to quote a part of the speech you made here five months ago, in July. It is part of what you said about the European Parliament. You said it is a place which, for ‘all Europeans who treat the idea of Europe seriously, is something special. It is a place which guarantees that the memory of where Europe has come from will be kept alive in our minds. In particular ... it is an institution and a place which has never stopped believing in the reason for having a united Europe’. Nearly six months have passed, and the Polish Presidency is coming to an end. We have been conscious of your conviction that it is possible to work together with the European Parliament in the interests of the people who live in the European Union. We are very interested in your review, and in your opinion on what the past half-year has been like and what lessons the Polish Presidency has learned from this for the future. Mr Tusk, please take the floor.

  Donald Tusk, President-in-Office of the Council. – (PL) Mr President, honourable Members, six months have passed since we met at the beginning of the Polish Presidency. On that occasion, I gave an assurance of the great importance which Poles attach, and which I personally attach, to the idea of a united Europe. I declared our attachment to the European Union, conscious of the fact that we were assuming the Presidency during a profound crisis. Not just a financial crisis, but – as we could already see then – also a crisis of confidence; while today, and I think we ought to say this unequivocally, it is perhaps also a crisis affecting our politics and the way we are governed.

Despite the fact that we were making our debut in the role of the Presidency, and perhaps precisely because of this, ours has been a Presidency of people determined to carry out their European assignment as well as we can. It is not just goodwill that we have invested in this Presidency, but also the efforts and the abilities of the hundreds of young Poles who have worked here in Strasbourg, in Brussels, in Warsaw and in many other places across Europe, and we have taken up the tasks – mindful of our limitations – which are the routine duty of every Presidency, including work on legislative matters. I will not give a list of everything we have done over these last six months.

I have heard many warm words in the last few days about our commitment and the effectiveness of our work. This may not sound very modest, but I do think the Poles have earned this praise, and they have done so precisely because it was with a belief in the reason for having a united Europe that they took on the challenges which fell to the Polish Presidency. Whether this was work on the ‘six-pack’, the accession of Croatia, the Eastern Partnership, energy security or other legislation, such as the single European patent, in all of these areas we have managed to achieve what we undertook to do and to complete our work. It was mainly because the Polish Presidency has been led by people who really do treat Europe seriously as a community and who – in spite of the crisis, or perhaps I should put that the other way round, precisely because we have been hit by the crisis, including the crisis of confidence – wanted to show that the responsibilities which rest with Europeans at such a time mean their commitment should be even more clear and unwavering.

I want to say that I would like to turn this review into a serious reflection in a political sense, a reflection which is the fruit of these six months of experience of the Polish Presidency, but I am sure that you, too, have reached similar conclusions and have a similar need to talk frankly about what is happening in Europe at the moment. This is because in spite of my satisfaction with the work which has been accomplished, I cannot say that Europe at the end of 2011 is a Europe which is more united than it was six months, a year or five years ago. Today, at the close of the Polish Presidency, I cannot say we have succeeded together in averting what may, in fact, be the most serious crisis to have afflicted our continent in the history of the united Europe. In fact, I would say quite the contrary. Today, we have to say very openly that we are at a parting of the ways. We face a very serious choice: during this crisis, and in looking for ways and means to exit the crisis, should we take the Community approach, and are we going to search for a European way to lift ourselves out of the crisis, or should we take the route of national and state egoism, looking selfishly for a way out on our own and considering the Union to be a burden rather than the best way for Europeans to overcome the crisis?

I want to remind you that the real source of the crisis, the financial crisis, was not the EU institutions. It was not in the European Parliament, the European Commission or other EU institutions that the crisis was born. European integration is not the source of the financial crisis, and so it is not the source of the political crisis either. These six months have shown with full force that it is exactly the opposite – that the crisis is feeding and growing fat on the threat of the Union falling apart, and that if today we cannot say we have succeeded in managing the crisis, it is because when responding to the crisis, Europe has not always acted as a community.

(Applause)

Why are we also talking about a political crisis today? It is because too many people in Europe, too many politicians in Europe, want to persuade us and to persuade Europe that the way out of the crisis is to abandon our work together as a community. I would like to say, however, that in my opinion, and in that of the Polish Presidency, this is a symptom of a kind of illness. The current crisis is undermining the sense of community. If we are hearing opinions in Europe today about how we need to reconsider the bases and the foundations of the Union, this is very clearly a symptom that the crisis exists not just in our banks, but also in our hearts. The last European Council meeting showed very clearly that some of us are searching for tools not only to rescue the euro, but also, in the long term, to strengthen the Union, but that there are others who think that the way to rescue the euro or the financial situation of the Member States and the institutions is a relaxation of the Union, and its eventual destruction. I am not accusing anyone, because these are points of view which are equally entitled to exist. We are all entitled to have our own vision for the future of Europe, but we cannot hide the fact that today, somewhere beneath the surface, there is in fact now a debate going on not about the future of the euro, but about the future of the Union.

At the last European Council meeting, we made decisions which are only a first step. Both in Brussels and in my own country, I have tried to persuade everyone that if we are not fully satisfied with this summit, it is because we have only taken a single step, and that we still continue to lack the single-minded determination necessary to take the next steps quickly and decisively acting as the Union and for the Union. When I hear some of the comments which are being made – they are, I am sure, being made in good faith, I am not accusing anyone of ill will – but when I hear comments full of satisfaction that Great Britain has become an island again and that the English Channel has suddenly become wider in comparison to several weeks ago, I have to say frankly that I do not understand this satisfaction.

(Applause)

We may not accept the decisions of politicians of one or another country, but we must not make a public display of delight that the distance between the Member States is growing before our eyes – in this case, the distance between the United Kingdom and the European Union. However, I would also like to say that other comments have also been made, such as that one capital has won against other capitals. We know that Europe, not only during the current crisis, but also for the future, needs strong political leadership. At the last European Council meeting, and over the last six months, I have witnessed this great European dispute, which has not yet been given a specific title: is the political leadership of Europe going to be the result of cut-throat competition between nation-states, and is the result of this competition going to be the domination of one, two or three capitals over the others, or, on the contrary, is the political leadership of Europe going to be the leadership of the Union and is it going to be working for the good of the whole Union? It is very important that we should be able to sum up each further meeting with the conviction that the Union has won against egoism, and not that someone has won against someone else in a disintegrating Union.

(Applause)

I would also like to say after these six months that Europe needs to examine its conscience together. We must not point the finger today and say: ‘there is the source of the crisis’ or ‘oh, it is that poor country in the south which has made problems for all the rest of us’. We also need a shared responsibility for the future. Northern Europe, which boasts about its discipline, must also come to a better understanding of the need for solidarity. Southern Europe must also understand that shared responsibility also means more discipline. We also have to say very clearly that the source of the crisis, not only the financial crisis, but also the political crisis, is to be found in breaches of our mutual obligations, including those which result from the Treaties, and that these breaches are not a question of the last few months. We should all examine our consciences. Each one of us should think about when we started to violate what had been agreed under the Maastricht Treaty. Each of us should think about whether we are really ready to uphold the Schengen arrangements.

(Applause)

We who are supporters of a truly integrated European Union have to say very clearly today that we need greater determination to protect the foundations of Europe, and not constant discussion of revision of these foundations. Therefore, I would like to conclude the Polish Presidency with an appeal to all the leaders of Europe without exception to undertake this effort to strengthen the Union, starting with themselves, and not to look for a way to break up, exclude or divide Europe. So today, let us say this yet again: we are for integration and against disintegration.

(Applause)

We are against divisions into better and worse, and we want to see increasing political unity in Europe. We are for responsibility, shared responsibility, in the face of selfish irresponsibility. We are against exclusions, because the Union must also be based on solidarity at times when some of us are in a worse situation and others are in a better situation. We need genuine political leadership, because Europe deserves prompt decisions – decisions about the immediate financial crisis, but also about the future. The crisis has proved to be a great test of the EU’s fitness. We have to start a serious debate about greater political fitness for Europe. Other crises and other conflicts will arise in the future. This crisis has shown us – and it is indeed a good thing that this has happened – that the European Union does not always react quickly, because there is a lack of trust – so fundamental a factor – in the institutions we have established. We cannot allow this leadership to be a leadership of one, two or three Member States, not even the strongest of them. Neither can it be a leadership of technocrats, because they do not have a democratic mandate. This leadership has to be political in nature, it has to have a democratic mandate, and it has to be accepted by all, in order to be able to force everyone to meet their responsibilities. It has to be a leadership based on the European institutions.

(Applause)

I would like to say that just as we need swift decisions in the next few hours, days and weeks to rescue the euro and stabilise the euro area, we also need honest and intensive discussion about a new political system for Europe. Not everyone accepts the EU order and we must not pretend any longer – today we do not know how to enforce the rules which we ourselves once set. Today, when it is convenient for us, we evade the responsibilities which the Treaties lay on us. So let us be honest with ourselves: we need a very profound and serious debate about a political system for Europe which will give us EU-based leadership. Therefore, the motto of our Presidency, ‘More Europe in Europe’, does, in fact, also have a political aspect. I think that the European Parliament is exactly the right place for this, and you should not allow anyone to deprive it of this clear historic and political mandate. This is the place that should become Europe’s constituent assembly. Nothing will be the same as it was before the crisis.

(Applause)

The status quo from before the crisis is out of the question. It is certain that Europe will be different after the crisis. The question is only will it be divided or will it be more integrated? It certainly will not be the same. It is you who have the democratic mandate and you, I think, should take on this great responsibility, this great challenge, and therefore the European Parliament should become the modern constituent assembly for this re-emerging Europe – because another Europe, a new Europe, is emerging as we watch. Let us do everything for it to become a united Europe, not a divided Europe.

This profound reflection must not be window dressing, as has been the case in the past. We have had groups of ‘Wise Men’, we have had task groups and committees. Everyone knew this reflection had to be carried out to prepare for the future, but the framework of a new political order has never come into being, and the crisis has made this fully and very forcibly clear. It is not a matter of thousands and tens of thousands of new pieces of legislation; it is about restoring the balance between what belongs to the realm of the Member States and what belongs to that of the Union, and of rebuilding trust based on a number of clear rules – rules which we all accept and which we are able to enforce in the case of those who want to break them. This is a crucial task, and I think it also falls to the European Parliament as the modern constituent assembly which is building the framework of a new political order. It is not a matter of frightening each other – the crisis is frightening people enough already – but if we do not succeed in this task, future generations will curse not only the crisis, but us too. Either today we take up the struggle for the Europe of the future, or tomorrow we grieve for the Europe we have now. Thank you.

(Applause)

  President. – Thank you, Mr Tusk, for your speech and for your review of the work of the Polish Presidency, and, in particular, for your presentation of the most important work facing Europe in the future, and also of the work facing the European Parliament as a directly elected body representing 500 million Europeans.

Thank you very much once again, Prime Minister, President-in-Office of the Council.

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. – Mr President, Mr Prime Minister, honourable Members, I would like to begin by saying straight away that the Polish Presidency of the Council has delivered very significant achievements under very difficult circumstances. The Polish Presidency has worked with great professionalism and enthusiasm.

Exactly 30 years after the introduction of martial law, Poland has shown during this Presidency its commitment to Europe, to democracy and to our common values. I am sure that everybody remembers Prime Minister Tusk’s inspiring speech here in this House six months ago. That speech came from the heart: a true act of faith in Europe and a strong appeal for more European integration. What you just said, Prime Minister and dear friend, about the Community spirit and the need to fight narrow national interests and egotism, and your support, without doubt, to strong European institutions is very inspiring and a great source of strength for us in these difficult times.

Six months later, we can say that Poland has lived up to its reputation and the Polish Presidency to our expectations. The Polish Presidency has held up the spirit of partnership between the European institutions and the Member States. Poland has constantly pushed for more Europe to address efficiently a crisis that has not only a financial and economic dimension but also, above all, a political one. There is just, as Prime Minister Tusk mentioned, a problem of confidence and of trust.

Let me highlight some of the concrete points we worked on throughout the Presidency. First, a strong Europe: a more stable Europe that can withstand all kinds of weather. A Europe that can learn from its own mistakes and can also address its weaknesses, building its recovery on sound and sustainable foundations.

We have laid the foundations on which any further reforms will be built. The adoption of the legislative package on strengthening economic governance – the ‘six-pack’ – has significantly reinforced the Stability and Growth Pact. It puts more emphasis on debt limitations and extends the Commission’s surveillance to macro-economic imbalances. Now we need to combine words with actions so that we can reinforce this stability culture.

Yesterday, the ‘six-pack’ entered into force. It will put the Commission at the heart of ensuring fiscal discipline, in line with the position of this Parliament. We will accept this increased responsibility knowing that its democratic legitimacy derives precisely from this House. To complete this set of tools, we have come up with two Article 136 proposals on further strengthening economic governance, and more proposals will come to bring the new fiscal compact as much as possible into our existing Union framework.

A strong Europe is also a Europe that is able to recreate the conditions for growth and job creation; as I said yesterday during the debate, we need stability, but we also need growth. That is why our 2012 Annual Growth Survey puts a strong emphasis on the need for implementation of growth-enhancing actions, and I welcome the support for our fast-track programme for measures with a significant impact on growth and jobs. This includes the proposals on the Single Market Act.

During the Polish Presidency, we have taken key decisions to prepare the relaunch of economic growth, through the development and strengthening of the single market, notably on the e-economy. I would also like to mention the very good progress made in the negotiations on the unitary patent, which showed the energy and constructive approach needed. I call on the Member States quickly to resolve among themselves the one outstanding issue: the seat of the litigation court under the intergovernmental agreement.

Growth is also about green growth, energy security and the fight against climate change, and we are moving forward on all these fronts. The Commission has already tabled proposals on completing the internal energy market, boosting energy efficiency, enhancing the coherence and coordination of our external energy policy and improving nuclear safety. Let me emphasise in particular the commitment of Poland to reinforcing the external dimension of the energy policy that has been adopted by the Energy Council.

On the fight against climate change, Durban was certainly not a perfect agreement, but in the difficult circumstances, we can say that it achieved some important results; in spite of all the scepticism, it was possible to make progress, with all major emitters agreeing for the first time to have a new comprehensive and binding legal instrument, which will include limits on CO2 emissions. This was only possible because of the leadership from the European Union, and I am particularly proud of the role that the Commission has played in this matter.

We will now continue our efforts with our international partners to flesh out a new global climate agreement involving all countries as quickly as possible, and we will no doubt have a strong partner in this Parliament.

The Polish Presidency has also put a lot of energy into defending a united Europe, and you have just heard the inspiring words of Prime Minister Tusk. Together with the Commission, the Polish Presidency has been a strong advocate of the preservation of the coherence and the integrity of the European Union.

What we need is more integration, not fragmentation. What we need is to consolidate our acquis and not to weaken what we have achieved over the last 60 years. What we need to do is to tap the full potential of the single market, not to damage it. What we need is more union, not a désunion.

(Applause)

This is exactly what the Community method guarantees. It enables us to join forces in the general interest. It reinforces our solidarity and our cohesion. Let me tell you very frankly that it was not insignificant that the discussions about the reinforcement of the euro area took place during the Polish Presidency, because Poland, whilst supporting very clearly a stronger economic governance of the eurozone, was also making clear that this stronger governance of the eurozone must not be to the detriment of the overall objectives of our Union. This was particularly important.

I want to say the same thing regarding the next Presidency. We are, I hope, going to continue to conclude the negotiations for this new fiscal compact during the Danish Presidency of the Council. With the very constructive position taken by the Prime Minister of Denmark, I am hopeful that we can conclude these negotiations with a stronger euro area and stronger governance but, at the same time, also with a stronger Union, because that is exactly what we need.

The last point I would like to make before concluding is about open Europe: united but also open Europe. Since the early days of European integration, our openness to the world and our attractiveness to our neighbours and to newcomers has always been one of our greatest strengths. Over these last six months, we have done a lot to advance our relations with our neighbours.

First, good progress has been made with enlargement countries on the European integration of the Western Balkans. Last Friday, we were happy to witness the signature of the Accession Treaty of our 28th Member State – Croatia – which will join in July 2013. This should constitute an incentive for the rest of the region to keep to the path of European reforms.

The successful summit with our Eastern neighbours hosted by the Polish Presidency in Warsaw confirmed our ambition to create the necessary conditions to accelerate political association and further economic integration between the European Union and interested partner countries within our enhanced neighbourhood policy.

Association agreements are being negotiated with four of the six eastern partners and deep and comprehensive free trade areas with three of them. This Monday, we started further negotiations with Georgia and Moldova. I will be travelling to Kiev next Monday, as we seek to conclude an association agreement with Ukraine. This House has called for the conclusion of the negotiations by the end of the year. The Ukrainian authorities need, however, to demonstrate that they abide by the principles and values that underpin this agreement, namely, respect for democracy, the rule of law, human rights and judiciary independence.

The establishment of the European Endowment for Democracy, an innovation also introduced by Poland, will greatly enrich the range of instruments at our disposal to support the process of democratisation and consolidate the aspirations of those fighting for freedom, including in places in our neighbourhood where democracy and rule of law needs to be encouraged.

Finally, I will travel to Warsaw tomorrow – once again – where I will participate in European Development Day, a Commission initiative, this time in cooperation with the Polish Presidency. This shows clearly that, even in times of crisis, the European Union does not forget about the need to show solidarity to developing countries and to the most poor of the world. As you remember, some time ago, when we had this enlargement, there were some suspicions in the developing world that the fact that Europe was enlarging showed that it conferred less interest and importance to the south of our planet. This did not happen; on the contrary, we are reinforcing our commitments to the developing world.

As I said, these were considerable achievements under difficult circumstances. But this crisis is not behind us, and we have a lot of work ahead. As we move forward, I would like all Member States to show the same level of commitment to Europe as Poland has shown.

(Applause)

The Polish Presidency will be a tough act to follow. The challenge ahead will now be with our Danish friends. In conclusion, let me very sincerely thank Prime Minister Tusk, all his team and his government, the team dedicated to the Presidency, for your leadership, your strong European commitment and your political courage. I think this was a great example for all the Member States which are committed to a stronger European union.

(Applause)

  Joseph Daul, on behalf of the PPE Group. – (FR) Presidents, Mr Tusk, ladies and gentlemen, this morning, rather than speaking myself, I simply wish to subscribe to your speech. At the end of the day, when it comes to speaking about Europe, your discourse is my discourse, it is ours, the discourse of our group, and indeed the discourse of many people within this Parliament.

On 6 July, you gave us your vision of a Europe proud of its values, of its successes, of an inclusive Europe, of a Europe confident in its power to exercise its influence throughout the world. This is a vision that we share. Paradoxically, the current crisis may turn out to be a unique opportunity for Europeans to recover their enthusiasm, to bounce back, providing that we are able to adapt, providing that we are able to change our habits and the way we operate.

Prime Minister, you indeed have suffered, and you know what suffering is. The old Europe no longer knows what it is to suffer.

President-in-Office of the Council, with your government – I shall use just three of the examples that you have mentioned – you have helped to achieve, over your Presidency, the ‘six-pack’ for economic governance. The Polish Presidency, working in close collaboration with the European Parliament on an ambitious package for strong national public finance management, has shown that the Community method can be effective and can sit very well with the euro and the European Union.

Similarly, we can credit to this Presidency progress on the supervision of financial markets. More generally speaking, Poland has been working side by side with the European institutions to advance the notion whereby it is an advantage and a way out of the crisis to share economic sovereignty between the 17, the 17 plus and Poland. As you so rightly said, and as I said yesterday, we must put together a way out of the crisis for our fellow citizens for January/February.

Second example: the neighbourhood policy. The Polish Presidency has worked extremely energetically, both on the Eastern front, with the signing of the accession of Croatia, and with the launch, last September, of the Eastern Partnership, with the preparation of the association agreement with the Ukraine, and on the Mediterranean front, with European support for the current democratic process. I thank it for that.

The third and final example is that in the field of law, the Polish Presidency has enabled considerable progress to be made both on the protection of patents and on European contract law. I hope that we will still be able to carry these through to completion under your Presidency. My group hopes that these efforts will be rewarded and that the final agreement will be signed in the days to come.

President-in-Office of the Council, the Polish Presidency has not just produced legislative texts. It has supported a principle dear to my parliamentary group and to the overwhelming majority of this Parliament, namely, the Community method. Indeed, your country, like all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, is more aware than any other country in Europe of the price of freedom, and the importance of solidarity. You have made effectiveness and respect for other people’s opinions a priority, without seeking to impose your own point of view. For many of our Member States, this is an example worth following. We are counting on you – for when you stand down from the Presidency, you will remain an influential member of the Council – to ensure that this Community method returns and is implemented.

I shall finish this speech by inviting every one of you in this House to read attentively Minister Radek Sikorski’s Berlin speech. On 28 November, he reminded us that we Europeans are in the uncomfortable position of standing on the edge of a precipice. If we take action, we can emerge from this situation, if not, we shall plunge into the abyss. The Polish Presidency has helped us to take action together. We now need to continue resolutely along this path. I shall repeat a sentence from a very well-known Pole, John Paul II: ‘Have no fear’. Let us work along the lines that you described this morning.

  Martin Schulz, on behalf of the S&D Group. – (DE) Mr President, I want to keep this brief. The Polish Presidency was, without doubt, one of the best that we have had in recent years. This is the 15th Presidency that I have experienced during my time as chair of my group. Let me repeat that: this was one of the best presidencies by far that I have experienced in these 15 six-month periods.

(Applause)

That applies not only to you, Prime Minister, but, above all, to your government and to the officials that we have got to know here. I would add that there is a high degree of professionalism in this government. I compliment you on this, as do my colleagues. You are so good that you could easily be a Social Democrat, Mr Tusk. Unfortunately, you have chosen a different path.

(Heckling: It is still possible, he is only young)

Historical mistakes can be rectified, Prime Minister, that is not a problem.

There was another development during the Polish Presidency which gives me greater cause for concern and which you touched on. Prime Minister. You said that we are at a crossroads. That is indeed the case. We are at a crossroads, because we are about to lose the confidence of the people in the democratic institutions. Incidentally, this is not only happening in Europe, at European level, but also at national level. People are increasingly losing confidence in the ability of the national institutions to act. Why is that? It is because there is a dramatic process under way that is constantly gaining speed. The power of the financial markets is now so great that even governments of large states are submitting to it instead of endeavouring to use the democratic institutions in such a way as to get the financial markets under their control. However, a nation state cannot manage that because the financial markets operate on a global, supranational level. What has happened is that we are dealing with an economic and financial market system which, in the truest sense of the word, is driving a Ferrari, and the control, where it remains with the nation state, is trailing behind on a bicycle. That is our problem. We therefore need transnational institutions at European level that are capable of getting to grips with this problem.

Defending the Community method involves nothing other than creating an instrument in the 21st century to deal with this economic development of the 21st century using the methods of this century and not those of the 19th century. That is what is meant by the Community method. Therefore, you said that we MEPs are the constituent assembly that has to bring that about. That is exactly how I see it, too. I would like to make it clear in this regard that I am not interested in another Treaty text. For every executive action that, due to the legal situation, reaches a limit in terms of no longer being able to control an economy that is coming apart at the seams, where this is the case, a parliament has to say: in that case, we will employ an alternative procedure for this executive action that is reaching its limits. Therefore, with regard to what we discussed here yesterday, namely, that this Parliament needs to have the courage to develop an alternative concept if the Council reaches its limits due to its complicated unanimity structure, I feel encouraged by you, Prime Minister, that this Parliament really must take exceptional measures, if necessary, even measures that go beyond the Treaty. The Council is also doing this, as we saw last weekend.

Therefore, as regards the comment by Ms Merkel, you and others that we are the strong Parliament, the strong constituent assembly, we take that on board. However, we are also calling on you to make it clear in the Council that, regardless of what we do, it must be given legitimacy by the European Parliament. I then expect you to present what you have announced here to the Council. If the others do not follow you, exercise your right of veto and say that you will not participate until the European Parliament is strengthened.

Mr President, I have greatly exceeded my speaking time. I am aware of that and I apologise. However, I would just like to say two things very briefly. The first is to congratulate my fellow Member, Mr Daul. He was re-elected yesterday with the support of 95% of his group and I am very pleased for him.

(Applause)

The second is that this is almost certainly my last speech here in plenary as chair of the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament. I know that many will be pleased that this is indeed my last speech as chair of this group. I would like to thank all those who have always listened so attentively to me and apologise to those I have wronged, and to all those who think that I am a good Member of Parliament, I would say: give me your vote for the next term of office! Thank you very much.

(Applause)

  Olle Schmidt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, Prime Minister, I am just an ordinary Member from a country outside the eurozone, but I am a true friend of Poland, Europe and the euro. My congratulations to Mr Daul. Before congratulating you, Mr Schulz, I will wait a bit.

(SV) Mr President, Mr Tusk, when you came to the European Parliament six months ago in your capacity as the Prime Minister of Poland and President-in-Office of the Council, we felt that you brought with you a more positive attitude towards the EU. It was as if someone had opened a window. It became easier to speak well of Europe. You did not mix domestic policy into the way that you managed the Polish Presidency. For that, we in the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe would like to thank you and all of your colleagues, in particular, our friend Mikolaj Dowgielewicz, who is sitting next to you. Many thanks!

Poland has held the presidential baton during a very challenging and demanding six-month period. Europe is still battling the aftermath of the financial crisis. The task of keeping the EU together during this period has not been an easy one. Poland has fulfilled its task in an exemplary fashion. Keeping Europe together over the last few days has been very difficult. The summit last week produced several good results, but not entirely what we had hoped for.

When a Member State – hopefully only one – goes against the grain and demands that the status quo be maintained, it is gratifying that other Member States can and want to move forward, but, at the same time, it means that we now risk having a Europe that will be running in two different gears. The gap between the countries within the Euro Plus Pact and the extended euro area and those countries that are merely spectators is at risk of increasing further. This applies to a great many Member States, including my own.

I hope, Mr President, and here I would also like to address Mr Duff, that the Liberals can convince Mr Cameron and his reluctant colleagues in London that nationalism and isolation are not the way forward. In these circumstances, Poland has shown greater political courage and stronger loyalty to the European cooperation. The ALDE Group welcomes this. Other countries, like my own country of Sweden, could learn from your example.

(Applause)

Let me conclude by saying to the Prime Minister that we should not forget that it was only 30 years ago – as you, Mr President, commented on Monday – that Poland introduced martial law, yet today, Poland is one of the leading countries in a united Europe. I – and we in the Liberal Group – salute you, Prime Minister Tusk.

  Bas Eickhout, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – (NL) Mr President, I should first like to sincerely thank Mr Tusk, on behalf of the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance, for his efforts during the euro crisis. This crisis has brought hard times, and I think that Mr Tusk, in particular through the speech he gave to this House on 6 July, with its very clearly personal historical perspective, highlighted just how important Europe is and made it clear that it is crucial for everybody that Europe is kept alive.

I also think that Mr Tusk and his government played a very positive role in the euro crisis during the Polish Presidency, and I would particularly stress the speech given by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, who, at the right time, called on Germany to take the lead in solving the euro crisis. We are not afraid of a Germany that takes the lead too little; we want a Germany that takes the lead more. That was a very nice gesture, particularly coming from Poland, and it enabled us to see how we in Europe should solve the euro crisis. We strongly thank Mr Tusk and his cabinet for that.

There is another crisis, however: the climate crisis. This gives cause for considerable criticism of the Polish Presidency. It began with a sort of false start at the Environment Council meeting in June, at which a veto from the Polish Environment Minister prevented any conclusion being reached on the future of climate policy. In Durban, too, however, the Polish Presidency unfortunately failed to play a positive role. Its main focus seemed to be on maintaining the level of hot air, the surplus of emissions, instead of considering how we can take steps internationally.

It is, above all, thanks to the Commission, to Ms Hedegaard, that Europe played a positive role in Durban. The Polish Presidency really failed to hit the mark there. The Greens wonder why it is that the Poles do not see that you have to solve the climate crisis in conjunction with the euro crisis. We will not escape the euro crisis simply by making cuts. In order to escape the euro crisis, we must specifically invest in the future and in a green economy, that is, an economy that works again and that also solves the climate crisis.

That is the policy that we would like to have seen from the Polish Presidency. As the Polish Presidency, you called on Germany to take the lead in the euro crisis. Unfortunately, you failed to lead Europeans on the climate crisis. You therefore have our compliments on your handling of the euro crisis, but we have to give you an ‘unsatisfactory’ mark in relation to climate policy.

  Tomasz Piotr Poręba, on behalf of the ECR Group. – (PL) Mr President, Mr Tusk, I would always like to be able to speak well in this Chamber of the work of the Polish Government and of the foreign policy which it pursues, but unfortunately, these six months of the Polish Presidency simply do not allow me that possibility. In my opinion, it has been a Presidency which was weak, unaspiring and short on ambition; a Presidency which, from the outset, accepted the very wrong assumption that Poland was only going to perform an administrative function in the European Union, and that we were not going to propose any ambitious goals, either for ourselves or for the European Union, such as those related to alignment of direct payments to EU farmers. We know that the disproportions are very great, and Poland, because it is an agricultural country, should have given particular attention to this matter. I regret that this has not happened.

The Polish Presidency was also passive in relation to the crises which arose in recent months – the Arab Spring and the war in Libya. As you know, it was not Poland but France which organised the European summit on this matter. The financial crisis – it was not Poland but Germany which organised the European summit on this. The Eastern Partnership, and the summit about this which was held in Poland – a total disaster. The summit failed to produce a conclusion. Instead of brokering agreement on a conclusion of the Eastern Partnership summit in Poland, Polish diplomacy was engaged in an election campaign.

However, there is something which is the last straw – last week’s European Union summit in Brussels, and Poland’s tacit agreement to proposals which defy common sense and logic and which mean that the poor, weak and cash-strapped Member States are going to contribute to the rescue of the euro area. Ladies and gentlemen, Mr Tusk, this is a mistake. It is something which should not have happened. You should not have remained silent on this, Mr Tusk – as the leader of the Polish Presidency, you should have said a firm no. Our neighbours were expecting this, as were the new Member States. What was missing was your voice, a firm voice of opposition on this matter. However, to say no to the European Union requires courage, strength and determination. You need to be strong in defence of Polish interests, but you also need to be strong in defence of the interests of the new Member States. I say this with sadness and regret, but in your case, that determination and that courage were missing. Unfortunately, this is how the Polish Presidency, the last six months, and you, Mr Tusk, will be remembered.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  Marek Siwiec (S&D), Blue-card question. – (PL) Mr President, I would like to ask Mr Poręba if he has read the document entitled ‘Declaration of Heads of State’, which was agreed in Warsaw on 29-30 September. I know it is a long document and that initially it was made available in a foreign language, so it was a little difficult. It comprises 29 points. It includes a point which says that a road map has been established for the introduction of a visa-free regime for the countries of the Eastern Partnership and, in particular, it mentions Ukraine and Moldova as countries which are leaders on this matter. Does Mr Poręba also consider this to be a failure of the summit?

(Applause)

  Tomasz Piotr Poręba (ECR), Blue-card answer. – (PL) Mr President, Mr Siwiec, you have specialised, Mr Siwiec, in making personal attacks, so with respect to you, but also with respect to this House, I am not going to argue at this point, but I assure you that I have read that document and I assure you that when it comes to foreign languages, just like you, I do not have a problem with this.

  Georgios Toussas, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – (EL) Mr President, the Polish Presidency helped to serve the interests of the European groups and to defend the bourgeois political system as the capitalist crisis and infighting between the imperialists within the European Union and in other imperialist centres worsened. It demonstrated merciless hostility towards the interests of the people, with the support of the other governments of the Member States of the European Union. It zealously pushed ahead with all the anti-grassroots decisions by the Council, the Commission, the governments and the political forces of capital: the EU 2020 strategy, reinforced economic governance, recent decisions by the European Council, the Stability Pact, enhanced fiscal austerity, work on the multiannual financial framework and a barrage of capitalist restructurings, causing painful consequences for the people and making their lives a living hell and, on the other hand, it introduced new privileges and a package of subsidies for the European monopolies and the financial system. It turned its back on decisions on the controlled bankruptcy of Greece, for which read the uncontrolled bankruptcy of the Greek working and grassroots classes, at the same time opening a Pandora’s box for bankruptcy to spread among the people of other Member States of the European Union, in order to rescue the profits of the plutocracy.

The Polish Presidency was marked by the imperialist war by the US, the European Union and NATO against Libya. The risk of imperialist war, of a general conflagration at regional level, is gaining ground. The people should not shed their blood in the war for the monopolies’ interests. The Polish Government, with the able assistance of the outgoing President of the European Parliament, strengthened and escalated the anti-communist hysteria spearheaded by the European Union. Hardly a day passed without its organising some sort of outrageous slander against twentieth-century socialism, without its promoting the rewriting of history and the vulgar equation of fascism and communism. It is precisely this aspect of the activities of the Polish Presidency which illustrates the fear of all the bourgeois governments of the European Union …

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Nikolaos Salavrakos, on behalf of the EFD Group. – (EL) Mr President, we are coming to the end of the six-month Polish Presidency of the European Council, the priority of which was European integration as a source of growth which would deepen and complete the single market. The Presidency must be judged against the background of the worsening economic crisis at both global and European level. We all know that the European economy is standing on shifting sands, meaning that economic governance needs to be extended and the so-called markets, which have turned into the exterminators of economic life on this planet, need to be reined in.

Two particularly important events during the Polish Presidency were the summits on 16 October and 8 December. The second has yet to prove if it will result in an intergovernmental compact on tight fiscal austerity in a bid to rescue the euro. Most probably, however, this compact will mark the chaotic breakdown of relations at summit level between the Member States, with disastrous repercussions for the future. The crisis exists, but Europe must also exist after the crisis. To close, I consider that the Polish Presidency was fairly successful.

  Angelika Werthmann (NI). – (DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Polish Presidency came at a very difficult time. The euro crisis, the problems relating to Greece and the general political and economic climate have created a situation in which the scope for implementing political ideas and desires was, and still is, limited. Despite this, or even because of it, this Presidency has been a successful one. In this regard, I would like to mention the work carried out during the 2012 budget process in particular. As a result of good preparation, knowledge of the facts and the good political judgment that is needed in difficult times, the Polish Presidency has excelled. Even if the result is a compromise that clearly cannot satisfy any side completely, the EU 2012 budget reflects a real policy that is appropriate for the circumstances and thus your achievement that, along with many others, we will remember in a positive light. In the last six months, you have presented yourselves here as Europeans. Thank you very much.

  Jacek Saryusz-Wolski (PPE). – (PL) Mr President, Mr Tusk, it was here in the European Parliament – the scene of the visible part of the Polish Presidency – that the Presidency began, was carried on by your ministers, Mr Tusk, and is now coming to a close. It had ambitious priorities: a dynamic economy, a Union which is open to its neighbours and to new members, and a Union which enjoys military and energy security. I think experience has shown that this choice of priorities was correct, but it has also created very difficult conditions for them to be achieved. Changes have taken place in the Southern and Eastern Neighbourhoods and a severe financial crisis has arisen – a debt crisis and an economic crisis – in other words, a positive explosion outside, to the south, and an implosion inside. The Polish Presidency – and you personally, Mr Tusk – have held the helm of the European vessel with a steady hand and have not allowed that vessel to be cut in half.

New dilemmas have arisen – the first being the form of government of the European Union to emerge from the crisis: should there be greater European integration or more examples of intergovernmental egoism? The Polish Presidency has provided pertinent recommendations and the right diagnosis: ‘more Europe’. The second dilemma: how can we avoid divisions and a two-speed Europe? We began the Polish Presidency in a Union of 17 plus 10. We are ending it in a Union of 27 minus one. I think this is the most important outcome at the end of our Presidency. The objective has been to preserve unity and solidarity in the European Union.

The Polish Presidency is ending with the message that the right response to external and internal challenges is more of the Community method, more of the European Union and more responsibility in Europe. I think that in the forum of Europe, too, the motto of your home city of Gdańsk, Mr Tusk, has proved its worth: ‘Neither rashly, nor timidly’.

(Applause)

  Bogusław Liberadzki (S&D). – (PL) Mr President, Mr Tusk, it is true that the Polish Presidency did come at a difficult time, one which could even be described as being full of dramatic moments. Following on from the Hungarian Presidency and your predecessor Mr Orbán, you brought in, Mr Tusk, a fresh atmosphere, belief in the European project and even European enthusiasm. You also brought with you responsibility and an atmosphere of European solidarity. We have to agree that the Polish Presidency has been an active one, and that the Polish Presidency has played the role of a European Presidency. Hundreds of meetings have been held in working groups and committees and at conferences. It can be said quite simply that routine work has progressed with good results. On European matters, you have had the support, Mr Tusk, of the Left in Poland and also of the Left here in the European Parliament, and Mr Schulz’s speech is the best proof of this.

The Presidency was initiated with a promise of great effort to regain confidence, improve cohesion and face up to the most important challenges by electing to adopt the Community approach. As time went on, it became apparent that this was a little less possible than had been expected. It became clear that the obstacle was the selfish attitude of national governments. I share the view of Mr Saryusz-Wolski that the success of the Presidency may turn out to be that we started with a Union of 17 plus 10, but that we will leave a European Union of 27 Member States. However, something which was missing from the Presidency, Mr Tusk, was the introduction of new initiatives to create new jobs, social policy on a European scale to increase the economic security of families, and also progress on the financial transaction tax and Eurobonds. In summary, there was goodwill, great effort has been made, and, as a result, there is much to be done. Could more have been done in six months? I do not think so.

  Alexander Alvaro (ALDE). – (DE) Mr President, I am pleased that the Polish Presidency was able to conclude its term in office so successfully. When you receive more praise from all the groups for your Presidency than I, like Mr Schulz, have ever heard in the 15 presidencies that I have had the good fortune to experience, then it is clear that the ‘P’ in Poland stands for ‘professional’. We would like to thank you for the work that you have done in that area. Unfortunately, a lot of what you have achieved in your Presidency has been overshadowed by the general focus of attention on the euro crisis and the debt crisis in Europe.

However, you did something very important that has not yet been mentioned. In the preparations for the multiannual financial framework of the European Union, your Presidency involved Parliament at a very early stage for the first time. I had the pleasure of leading a European Parliament delegation in Sopot. We in Parliament were involved in these discussions at an earlier stage than we have ever been before. That is important to us. We hope that the same thing will happen in future, too. In the areas of justice and home affairs, in which I have also been working for many years, you have achieved a significant amount of success in connection with combating child abuse as well as in other areas. I could say that you are concluding your Presidency with a results sheet of successful action that I would like to see followed in a similar way by other European states and companies. I would like to thank you, and I look forward to our continued cooperation in a different context in the Council.

  Jacek Olgierd Kurski (ECR). – (PL) Mr President, Mr Tusk, I am torn, today, between pride and disappointment. Pride at the fact that Poland and someone from Poland have held the Presidency, disappointment at the results of the Presidency. Mr Tusk, you have had an exceptional opportunity to include an effective Presidency for Poland in a framework of effective measures for the whole of Europe, as your predecessors did for their countries. You could have initiated discussion on harmonisation of direct payments to farmers. There is no reason at all why, in future years, Polish farmers are to be given EUR 150 per hectare less than German farmers. Rural areas in Poland will lose billions of euro in coming years because of this. You could have proposed suspension or revocation of the climate package because of the crisis in Europe, a package which, in its present form, means that electricity prices in Poland are going to rise by 100% within eight to ten years. You could have initiated discussion on shale gas and made it the flywheel of European energy solidarity, guaranteeing the development of our country and energy security for Europe. You have not done any of these things. This will result in the loss of billions of euro for our country and the historical responsibility for this will fall on you. Instead of this, you have proposed a change in the architecture of Europe and a change in the rules – a departure from a Union of equal nations in favour of the dictate of the great powers, powers which your minister, in a peculiar expression of homage in Berlin, asked to give leadership in Europe.

I wanted to remember your Presidency as a great success for Poland in an equitable Europe. I will remember that you ordered a whip-round among Poland’s old-age pensioners, other pensioners and workers to rescue the euro area, although your minister was asked to leave its meetings only a couple of months ago.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  Lena Kolarska-Bobińska (PPE), Blue-card question. – (PL) Mr President, I do not think my fellow Members, Mr Kurski and Mr Poręba of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group, understand what the nature of the Presidency has been and still is. The Presidency is not a time for taking care of national affairs and interests. The Presidency is a time in which European interests are settled, and in which efforts are made to bring about effective solutions, to conciliate and to build, and in this role, Poland has come forward with a variety of proposals and has been exceptionally active, which is confirmed by this debate today. I do not think you two gentlemen can hear it, as if you have come here from another planet, the planet of Poland’s Law and Justice Party, or, in Mr Kurski’s case, from the now not Law and Justice planet.

  Jacek Olgierd Kurski (ECR), Blue-card answer. – (PL) Mr President, I will very gladly reply to Ms Kolarska-Bobińska. I would be very pleased to recall any creative, new initiatives of the Polish Presidency, but both the ‘six-pack’ and the accession of Croatia were already decided before our Presidency. However, I will remind Ms Kolarska-Bobińska that an effective Presidency, as this was understood by France or Germany, for example, means precisely this: ensuring that measures which are interesting and good for your own country are included in the framework of measures for the whole of Europe. Does Ms Kolarska-Bobińska not remember that when Germany held the Presidency of the EU Council, it took care of one matter in particular – the Lisbon Treaty? Germany settled it then, in 2007. However, it has somehow strangely turned out that it is precisely Germany, as the most populated Member State, which has gained the most from the fact that we have abandoned the Nice rules, under which Germany had 29 votes compared, for example, to Poland’s 27 votes, in favour of the system of double majority voting, under which, as the Member State with the largest population, it has the highest number of votes today. Does Ms Kolarska-Bobińska not remember that when France held the Presidency in 2008, it included as many measures in the climate package as possible? It is, in fact, France which will earn the most from the fact that it is going to sell its nuclear reactors and move away from traditional technologies. In other words, it is possible to take care of your own affairs and include them in the framework of measures for the whole of Europe, and this is what I had expected from Mr Tusk.

  Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL). – (EL) Mr President, Prime Minister, the Polish Presidency was linked with the worst crisis experienced by the European Union, a crisis that is not only embracing the weak countries, but that is also damaging the nucleus of the European Union. A week ago, the leaders of the European Union decided to adopt harsher measures to cut wages and pensions, to cut social spending and to cut spending on education. They decided to build a Europe in which democracy, rights, freedoms and grassroots and national sovereignty will have meaning when there are no elections in Germany, when there are no problems with the German and French banks’ balance sheets. Prime Minister, a short while ago, your Minister for Foreign Affairs stated that he is more scared of German inertia and procrastination than of German might. My question to you is this: the decision is yours; I have listened to your concerns, I have listened to your fears. Can you send out a message of optimism about these decisions to Polish workers, to European workers, so that they do not fear for their children’s present and future?

  Jaroslav Paška (EFD). – (SK) Mr President, the past six months, during which the Community has been presided over by a Polish administration, have been extremely difficult. The economic and debt crisis has worsened, and the political bodies of the Union have had to work very hard to respond effectively to the changing situation. The Polish Presidency has worked very reliably and properly in this difficult period, with no administrative or technical slip-ups. The country has, at the same time, gone through parliamentary elections and voted in a new government. These changes have had no unfavourable impact whatsoever on the reliable work of the Polish administration in conducting the EU Presidency. We must thank the entire Polish political establishment for this. That includes the opposition, who did not sink to unfair and unconstructive practices in the election campaign, which would have had an unfavourable impact on implementation of the mandate of the Polish Presidency. I would like to add my voice to those that have been expressing thanks to the Polish Prime Minister and to his country for the extremely professional job they have done work over the past six months in leading the work of the European Community.

  Diane Dodds (NI). – Mr President, firstly, may I acknowledge the work of the Polish Presidency in recent months. However, Prime Minister, it is with no satisfaction that I stand before you now and say that the Polish Presidency will be remembered as one that has overseen the EU on its sickbed, the euro in perhaps terminal decline, and the EU institutions in denial as to the medicine required to cure the ills of its economy and its suffering people.

What has also been alarming has been the sense that in the course of this Presidency, the institutions of the EU have become increasingly anti-British. Actions have been taken with the sole intent of inflicting damage on the UK, and we have witnessed a growing anti-British rhetoric in this House. That is deeply regrettable for democracy and these institutions.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  Paul Rübig (PPE), Blue-card question. – (DE) Mr President, I would like to ask what influence the British press had here on the decision at short notice not to be involved in the new common structures. Do you think there were influences from outside Europe at work here?

  Diane Dodds (NI), Blue-card answer. – Mr President, I would like to think that the British press, like the press in the rest of Europe, particularly the press in Germany that has been particularly anti-British over the last number of days, would have had little or no impact on a Prime Minister who had to decide what was right for the United Kingdom.

Can I also say that this House tends to put on its blinkers when someone disagrees with it. Difference can be good; it can be a force for good and can force others to look at other people’s views. It is not the United Kingdom that these institutions have to convince that the agreement that was made last week will work: it is the markets. The markets have so far failed to be impressed and the people of Europe will continue to suffer in the heat of the markets until these institutions show leadership.

  Markus Ferber (PPE). – (DE) Mr President, Mr Tusk, Mr Barroso, ladies and gentlemen, I can only agree with all of those who have congratulated the Council Presidency. Not only were you an honest broker during a difficult time; you were also a European broker. That was very nice to see during these difficult times in which we are seeing political trends in a number of Member States that suggest to the people that it would be possible to achieve more alone than together. You focused on what unites us. It was also very refreshing to see that, with this clear European agenda, you also received the support of the people in Poland on domestic policy matters. That was not particularly easy in this context. Therefore, I have the highest respect for what you have achieved.

In this six-month period, we were also able to get a few things under way in the area of financial market regulation. Allow me to highlight just one area in which I was able to join in the negotiations myself, namely, the question of the regulation of short selling and naked credit default swaps in connection with government bonds, where the Commission did not have the confidence to propose a stringent regulation and with regard to which all the Member States said that we would not succeed, and where, thanks to the Polish Presidency, we did succeed in imposing sanctions against a highly speculative instrument and, where necessary, prohibiting it, so that we could help to bring greater stability to the financial markets. I would particularly like to thank your Finance Minister and the Secretary of State, who got this off the ground during a difficult discussion process between Parliament and the Council. That is an example that shows that we can do something together in the interests of security and stability in Europe. I would like to express my sincere thanks for that.

  Hannes Swoboda (S&D). – (DE) Mr President, Mr Tusk, I would, of course, like to congratulate you, too, as well as your many colleagues with whom I personally have had very good discussions and have experienced excellent cooperation. However, you have received so much praise that I would also like to say a few words of criticism – beyond the nationalistic and pseudo-revolutionary argument that has been present here.

Prime Minister, you said that many people are living in this Europe as though they were not in a community. You are absolutely right about that. That applies not only to Mr Cameron; we have also noticed this sometimes where Ms Merkel and Mr Sarkozy are concerned, too. I do not know how often you or your colleagues had to wait outside the door because talks were going on behind closed doors in the belief that it is possible for a small group to impose something on the European Union. Perhaps, on occasion, you should have been more forceful and made it clear that Europe is a community and everyone must be involved in the talks, and the euro is also a common currency, even if not everyone has adopted it.

My second point concerns Durban, which has already been mentioned. This disappointed us. All of the Members who came back were disappointed by the position taken by the Polish Presidency. I understand that you were in a difficult position as regards environmental and energy policy. However, I hope that we have a genuinely common environmental policy.

As regards democracy, in some Member States of the European Union, we are seeing developments that are not very democratic. I have seen a picture of you appearing at the party congress with Viktor Orbán. I do not know what you said to Mr Orbán and whether you said that he could take the Polish democracy as an example – also a post-Communist country – and did not necessarily need to follow the Hungarian way of doing things.

The last point I would like to mention concerns the growth strategy. We could perhaps have done with more initiatives in this regard. Nonetheless, I would like to thank you very much for your work. I hope that, as the Polish Prime Minister, you will continue to pursue many of these issues actively in Europe.

  Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR). – (PL) Mr President, Mr Tusk, I do not mean to insult you, Mr Tusk, because you do not deserve this. However, I do mean to criticise you, because this is something you do deserve. This is because I do not have the same conviction as you do that this Presidency has been such a good one, and because we know, for example, that the Polish Presidency has been criticised by Amnesty International for not having an effective policy on Belarus. Jacques Delors has said that it is being ignored. In contrast to Mr Siwiec, I consider the results of the Eastern Partnership summit to be insufficient and unsatisfactory. I think, too, that the recent summit in Brussels does not mean we are dealing with a dual-speed Europe but a Europe of two directions, Mr Tusk, and, in my opinion, you have chosen the wrong direction.

You have made a speech today, and Mr Schulz has said that, in fact, it was one which could please everybody, and he also said that you could be enrolled as a social-democrat. That is not a compliment, because you are a liberal conservative. You should have acted like a liberal democrat and you should have defended such values in Europe. I have the impression that the speech which you made was the kind of speech you might make if you were starting the Presidency, and not presenting a review of it. If you had made such a speech five months ago, I would have understood this. However, today you should have come with this document. Mr Tusk, this is the document entitled ‘Priorities of the Polish Presidency’. Three priorities. I thought you were going to give an account of these priorities, and that this is what your speech today was going to be about, and that you would give a presentation of what we have done in the Union.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  Krzysztof Lisek (PPE), Blue-card question. – (PL) Mr President, Mr Migalski, I would like to ask you, Mr Migalski, why you have not been listening carefully to what is being said about the Eastern Partnership by the leaders of the Eastern Partnership countries? Yesterday, President Saakashvili praised Poland for its initiative in the Eastern Partnership. The leaders of all the Eastern Partnership states have been praising Poland. Why do you say that Poland’s involvement in support for the opposition in Belarus is insufficient, when all opposition leaders in Belarus are saying that Poland is playing a leading role on this in Europe? Why are you criticising the Polish Presidency when all the Members of this Parliament – I mean fellow Members from other countries – are praising it? Perhaps you and your friends do not attend Parliament often enough.

  Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR), Blue-card answer. – (PL) Mr President, I will permit myself not to react to that last personal comment, as I think it was just something that slipped out unnecessarily. However, my main response is as follows: I say these things because I think for myself and because I prefer to listen to Amnesty International and its comments on the situation in Belarus. I prefer, too, to have my own opinion about the conclusions of the Eastern Partnership summit, because I can discern diplomatic language, as I did yesterday, for example, at what was actually an extremely pleasant and very successful Christmas reception. Besides, I spoke to President Saakashvili yesterday and I had the impression that we do understand what Georgia should be given and what the European Union should be doing about this. My short answer to your question, Mr Lisek – I think for myself; not everyone here thinks the same way as you.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI). – (DE) Mr President, as we all know, the Polish Presidency started its term of office with grand intentions, and, indeed, Poland has performed its Council Presidency duties impeccably. As a point of criticism, however, we have to say that the last six-month period was dominated by the sovereign debt crisis, and in that respect, Poland has, of course, played a subordinate role simply because it is not part of the euro area. Without a doubt, the course of events was instead steered by France and Germany, whether in relation to the reform of the economic and monetary union or with regard to the stability mechanism. Even in the priority area of energy policy, no major successes could be achieved. Things have instead gone rather quiet with regard, in particular, to the EU-wide nuclear power plant stress test. That is not surprising, as Warsaw is still sticking to its nuclear power plant plans despite the impression left by Fukushima and Germany’s move away from nuclear power.

At the climate change conference in Durban, it was probably also to be expected that a country holding the Presidency that has such a high level of CO2 emissions was unable to put all its efforts into promoting the ambitious EU climate targets. However, there is one area where we can be very thankful that the Polish ambitions did not bear fruit and that is the advancement of the accession of Turkey. Instead, that is once again a long way off.

  Jean-Paul Gauzès (PPE). – (FR) Mr President, Mr Tusk, Mr Barroso, of course, I shall say, like most of my fellow Members, that the Polish Presidency has been a success, and has worked effectively over a difficult period. However, contrary to what has just been said, perhaps the high point of this Presidency is the speech looking back over it that you have just given, Prime Minister.

You encouraged us with utmost lucidity and a sense of realism – let me remain within the atmosphere of yesterday evening’s Polish Christmas dinner – to examine our consciences. This is something that we do less and less. Everyone shows their satisfaction, self-satisfaction or indulges in self-praise while you, today, asked some hard questions. However, the European Parliament also needs to examine its conscience. It is not enough to demand greater powers, greater cooperation and greater presence. We, too, have to be capable of a rapid and effective response if we are to survive within our institutional environment.

I think that we shall have the opportunity to do so over the next few days with the growth report. I happen to have been tasked with the own-initiative report and we are going to suggest that Parliament be allowed to intervene and make proposals in relation to the Commission’s proposals, either to support them or to suggest new approaches.

Today, the time has come to have a renewed democracy and Parliament must have a place within it.

  Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D). – (PL) Mr President, the logo of the Polish Presidency, which features different coloured upward-pointing arrows, was meant to show Poland as a modern and youthful country able to initiate positive change throughout Europe. In the six months of the Presidency, representatives of the Polish Government have endeavoured to demonstrate those qualities and to show the important role played in Europe by consistent action, solidarity among Member States and persistent pursuit of the objective in view. Comments regarding the Polish Presidency report that it was quiet but effective.

The most important points of the Polish programme to be completed were finalisation of the ‘six-pack’, organisation of the Eastern Partnership summit in Warsaw, salvage of at least two further years of the EU food programme and signing of the Accession Treaty with Croatia. Also completed successfully were talks on the European Protection Order in criminal cases and on the European digital agenda, whose basic priority concerns issues of digitalisation, access and protection of cultural heritage, in particular, in the context of development of the EU’s digital library, Europeana. For me – as rapporteur for the directive on permitted uses of orphan works, which was a priority for the Presidency – these matters were particularly important. In the last six months, it has also been possible to achieve progress on the European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy and the Single European Patent, where negotiations which had been going on for over 30 years were brought to completion.

The Polish Presidency has not just been about political action, because it has also involved cultural activity. Over the last six months, an exceptionally varied cultural programme has been presented in Europe’s largest capitals and elsewhere, in an effort to introduce Europeans to Polish music, art and theatre.

(Applause)

  András Gyürk (PPE). – (HU) Mr President, Mr Tusk, ladies and gentlemen, the Polish Presidency deserves praise for having stood its ground. Despite an extraordinary economic situation and, let me point this out as a Hungarian Member, by making good use of the legacy of the Hungarian Presidency, it followed through on its programme. It is a success that the ‘six-pack’ for the reinforcement of common economic governance finally entered into force. It is a success that the Accession Treaty of Croatia was signed a few days ago. And yes, the organisation of the Eastern Partnership summit is also a success. The Polish Presidency also mobilised considerable efforts in the field of energy policy. Granting the Commission an EU negotiating mandate in order to strengthen import competition is a step forward. EU action vis-à-vis third countries can thereby be made more efficient, which is in the common interest of 500 million European consumers.

The commencement of negotiations on the Trans-Caspian gas pipeline is another significant achievement, and could substantially improve supply security for the EU. Finally, we are still working at full intensity on implementing the single market, which could lead to a reduction in the differences between Member States’ energy markets. Ladies and gentlemen, these examples illustrate well that the successive Hungarian and Polish Presidencies have, by strengthening each other, achieved significant results in the past year. Thanks to these, Europe undoubtedly became stronger in 2011 in the areas mentioned.

  Mario Mauro (PPE). – (IT) Mr President, the Italian delegation to the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) is most grateful to the Polish Presidency for the work which has been carried out.

If I had to sum up this contribution in one word, I would say ‘hope’, because in this Chamber, the Polish finance minister has reminded us that differences left unresolved between us in Europe could lead us to conflict if we are unable to come together in the spirit of European ideals.

The Polish Presidency has done well to grasp the profound sense of the dramatic circumstances which we are currently experiencing, and similarly I thank him for having made every effort to help us overcome our problems in order to be able to provide food relief to those in need.

This was invaluable work, carried out alongside the Commission, which allowed us to come together in a way that our citizens could see was very real: in this way, we remembered that Europe is a real hope, which is to say, the only certain road for our future.

  Edit Herczog (S&D). – (HU) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Polish Presidency chose progress over stagnancy, opening over introversion, efficiency over noise, and Union over defiant separation. We can therefore rightly say that ‘Polska, Europa, dwa bratanki, i do szabli, i do szklanki’.

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). – Mr President, the rotating Presidency of the Council since the Lisbon Treaty is not quite the position that it once was. Presiding over the European Councils passed to the president of that body, and presiding over the Foreign Affairs Council has passed to the Vice-President/High Representative. Furthermore, presiding over finance policy has moved out of the hands of the rotating Presidency. It does still retain some function, but it seems that Member States are such unpredictable creatures that they cannot be left to run EU institutions without being guided by a professional. It will be interesting to see how long presiding over the remaining functions will be left in the hands of the Member State holding the rotating Presidency.

The function of the Presidency, of course, is to preside over decisions that were initiated elsewhere and to grant Member State authority to the legislative process, rather than to exercise power, which is exercised by permanent bureaucrats.

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE). – (RO) Mr President, just as the Romanian President also stated last night, Romania is among those who appreciate what the Polish Presidency has done during the last six months.

I would therefore like to commend the efforts and efficiency demonstrated by the Polish Presidency and list a few achievements and very important decisions adopted by this Presidency. One of these is the budget increase to EUR 1.9 billion by 2013 for the various Eastern Partnership programmes, which is greatly appreciated. We then have the introduction of Erasmus-type programmes geared towards students from the Eastern Partnership states, which is of paramount importance to the future of young people. Lastly, we have the opening in Warsaw of an Academy of Public Administration intended to provide training for officials in the eastern states.

All these are practical tools which help civil society and the young generation to become more aware of the benefits of integration and of what a European perspective means.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) . – (ES) Mr President, as Chair of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, I, too, want to echo the recognition here for the Polish Presidency because it has achieved a great deal in the area of freedom, justice and security and this has not been sufficiently emphasised in previous speeches.

It has made progress on sensitive issues such as child abuse, sexual exploitation and the right to information in legal proceedings, and it has brought to fruition an initiative of the Spanish Presidency aimed at protecting victims, the European Protection Order.

Above all, however, it has driven forward two extremely complex packages of measures, making a real difference, in which ministers who are no longer in government, such as Minister Miller, were also closely involved: the asylum package and the migration package.

These highly complex issues have received a crucial boost during the Polish Presidency and I hope that their journey through the European Parliament, which is one of the colegislators in the European Union’s ordinary procedure, will be completed during the Danish Presidency.

  Giuseppe Gargani (PPE). – (IT) Mr President, I followed this morning’s debate and I have to say to the Polish President that what emerged showed far greater consensus than dissent.

I personally belong to the group of people who expressed consensus and I would like to underline a very important part of the Polish President’s speech which yesterday provoked very lively discussion: You said, with regret, that the intergovernmental approach tends to take precedence over the European Community approach.

The European Community has not seen the kind of development that we imagined for some years now, and the intergovernmental approach – as President Barroso clearly explained yesterday – paralyses the momentum which EU law would otherwise have achieved over the past few years.

The prevalence of EU law is at odds with an intergovernmental approach which fails to give rise to that hope, that potential in Europe, which you, as President for the past six months, have helped to create.

Taking everything into account, we do not think the summit had either negative or positive conclusions, but left us with questions which will find answers in March. I think your Presidency has somehow prevented the fall of Europe, and we hope things will continue to develop in that vein in the year ahead.

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. – Mr President, Prime Minister, honourable Members, the Presidency of the Council is, of course, not just an event: it is a process. By definition, a rotating Presidency has to be integrated into that process, so it is true – as some of you said – that many of the achievements of the Polish Presidency were also the result of work done before, and we should recognise that.

At the same time, it is also important to see what this Presidency of the Council will leave to the next Presidencies. There are important contributions in this direction that I would like to highlight, particularly in connection with the multiannual financial framework.

As you will remember, the Commission presented the multiannual financial framework for 2014-2020 at the end of June, just before the beginning of the Polish Presidency of the Council. The different proposals for a legal basis have now been approved and sent to the legislator.

I would like to underline the contribution given to the debate by the Polish Presidency in advancing the files in the Council through the initiative of the conference on the multiannual financial framework between this Parliament, the national parliaments, the Member States and the Commission, and in keeping this House fully involved through the meetings between President Buzek, Prime Minister Tusk and myself, as well as the follow-up briefings on all meetings of the General Affairs Council. I hope that the next Presidencies will keep the same level of involvement of all the institutions. I want once again to reiterate that the Commission, Commissioner Lewandowski and I will give this file the highest priority.

Another point – which was also highlighted by a Member of this Parliament, Mr Mario Mauro – is the Polish Presidency’s contribution to achieving an acceptable compromise on the programme of aid for the most vulnerable people. While I am not completely happy with this compromise, I think it was important to maintain this support for the most vulnerable people. I continue to think that it is unacceptable – and very hard to understand why – that some governments, given the situation of social emergency that we have today in Europe, are not ready to commit to more solidarity in times of crisis. We need to keep this commitment to the poorest of our continent.

One point that was highlighted – above and beyond the various files – is what the Polish Presidency brought in terms of commitment to Europe. One very important and memorable contribution was its commitment to the European institutions. What we have said today, Prime Minister Tusk, regarding the European institutions and regarding this Parliament, is very important. I wish that all the Heads of Government could recognise the importance of this Parliament, as you do, because in fact, we need to reinforce European democracy, particularly now, when we are taking important decisions that touch upon the very important issue of the sovereignty of the Member States.

For instance, the decisions that are now being taken in terms of fiscal responsibility touch on very sensitive issues of sovereignty. We have to complete those decisions on more integration with more democracy, both at national and at European level. Some people believe that democracy only exists at national level. They have not yet understood that in Europe, we also have a democracy, and that this Parliament is essential for this democracy. If someone believes that in the 21st century, democracy is only national, they have understood nothing about globalisation and about the 21st century.

That is why, to have these decisions in terms of more advanced integration, we need to reinforce democracy and to complete national democracy with European democracy. We must not set national parliaments against the European Parliament but, on the contrary, reinforce the idea of cooperation between the different levels of democracy. That is why, Prime Minister, what you said today regarding the role of the Community institutions, and the role of this Parliament, is very important.

I hope, in the discussions we will be having in the next months, that this message is understood: the need to complete the fiscal compact with this Parliament and with the national parliaments, so that we can indeed have a strong European democracy.

If we do not have a strong European democracy – if some people believe that, because of so-called national sovereignty, we should not accept European democracy – what will happen is that the true sovereignty, the material sovereignty, will be left to the markets, to international priorities that nobody controls, without any kind of democratic scrutiny. That is why we have to create stronger European sovereignty to protect the democratic rights of our peoples.

(Applause)

  Donald Tusk, President-in-Office of the Council. – (PL) Mr President, honourable Members, I would like once again to express my sincere thanks for six months of work together, and also for this debate today, both for the voices which have focused on the effort and the results of the Polish Presidency, but also for those voices which have expressed criticism. I and my team find satisfaction in being persuaded that the critical voices were in a clear minority, but I hope you will allow me to refer to some of them very explicitly. I would like to stress once again that what is most important is bold thinking and bold action for strengthening the Union. This is important not just from the point of view of the Polish Presidency, because it is a job for the next Presidency – and I have spoken about this with the Prime Minister of Denmark – as well as for future Presidencies and, in particular, for all the European institutions. It is also the most important effect of our debate today. In relation to this, I would like to accentuate very clearly that I do not agree with the words of one of my opponents, Mr Poręba, who said – and this may serve as a symbolic digest of this debate – in commenting on the last European Council, that ‘you need to have courage and a sense of self-respect to say no to the European Union’. That is an exact quotation. Well, I would like to say that today, you need to have courage, a sense of self-respect and imagination to say yes every day to the European Union.

(Applause)

I also want to explain to you, Mr Poręba, that your criticism that the Polish Presidency was not the host of the meeting on Libya in March this year is inaccurate, because the Polish Presidency began on 1 July. It would have been very difficult for me to take the role of initiator and host of such a meeting at that time.

As for the kind but also at a certain point critical words about Durban which we heard from our friend, Mr Eickhout, from the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance: it is no secret that Poland is not at the forefront of the movement for climate protection. It is true that no one is perfect and not everyone is going to be ideal in a particular role, and this is understandable. I would ask for understanding here. In the case of Durban, just as with all other action for climate protection, but particularly when we are talking about matters such as those which were being decided in Durban, the Polish Presidency wanted most of all for Europe not to be isolated in its efforts for the adoption of pro-climate measures. We think – and I will always stress this – that climate protection measures constitute an absolute priority for the European Union, but they should not be naive measures, and they would have been naive if we had taken on challenges which were not global challenges, by which I mean if they were not being taken on by our partners from outside the European Union. This is why I do think we made a step forward in Durban. Once again, it was too small a step, but it was a step nonetheless: we managed to build a collective decision, not only within the Union, but on a global scale, and this was a step forward. You are right, Mr Eickhout, that it was inadequate, but I am hoping that in the future, it will be possible to build an agreement on climate not just within the European Union, but that we will be able to be increasingly effective in encouraging other countries to join us, including Russia, China, Brazil, India and the United States, so that we will not be alone in this effort, because if we try to do this alone, we will perhaps pay a price which is too high, particularly at this critical time.

I am pleased, too, that mention has been made here of things which we have done but which I did not intend to mention. One speaker said I should have given a report on what we had planned to do. That report, please believe me, would be a long one. I think the Polish Presidency – this is testified to by what has been said here – has accomplished the specific tasks to which we committed ourselves, and we have done so in a way which has been truly effective and which has brought truly good results. I did not want to take up your time by giving a day-by-day or month-by-month account of all the efforts which have been crowned with success. I am pleased that one thing has been highlighted which for us, too, was very important – the protection of people who are excluded. Not just the protection of weaker Member States, but also the protection of people who are excluded – the weakest groups of people. Yes, one of our initiatives – and I am very enthusiastic about this issue – was the protection of children, not only from poverty, but the protection of children from violence and sexual abuse. I would like to express my sincere thanks to all those who have helped the Polish Presidency take that further clear step for the protection of children who have been the victims of such violence.

The same applies to the proposal concerning the scheme for food distribution to the most deprived persons. It has been possible, literally in the last few days, to achieve what the Polish Presidency wanted. This scheme is going to be in operation for the next two years, if I remember rightly, and it is something which is very important, too, during a crisis. I would like to thank everyone very warmly once again for their support and cooperation on these specific projects.

(Applause)

Please allow me to do one more thing as I close. I think it is understandable. I would like to thank the President of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek. Yes, these six months have, in a certain sense, been six Polish months in the European Union. The head of Parliament, the Polish Presidency, but also – I think I can say this – that Polish pro-European optimism, which, in spite of the difficulties, in spite of the crisis, has been in evidence, both here in this Parliament and around us. I hope it will be possible to retain this pro-European optimism and energy, because they are going to be very much needed. They are perhaps the most important tools for a crisis. It may be they seem lightweight and hard to quantify, but they are perhaps the most important: energy, optimism, trust; and I hope everyone can have them. Thank you very much, Jerzy, for your help – we have always been able to count on you. I would also like to thank José Manuel. You have been a great friend of this Presidency, and truly without you, this Presidency would not have ended with such results. Thank you so much. Finally, I wish every success to the Danes, the Danish Prime Minister and the Danish Presidency. We will be at your service and at the service of all those who want to make Europe stronger. In this work, you will always be able to count on the Poles. Thank you.

(Applause)

  President. – Thank you, Mr Tusk. The Polish Presidency, as can also be seen from the applause and sympathy it is receiving in the Chamber, has gained the respect of the European Parliament, of many countries and of many representatives of the European Union for precisely the attitude we have just seen expressed – an attitude which is exceptionally worthy of the European Union, one which fosters the further development of the Union and which also fosters the discovery of answers to the most important and most difficult questions which we face in the Union today. We have endeavoured to respond to these difficulties during this Presidency, and the Polish Government and the Polish Representation have helped us effectively in this. Naturally, I would like to thank you for the kind words you addressed to me, but it was the European Parliament which created the atmosphere and it is the European Parliament which gives strength to successive presidencies. It also gave – I am sure of this – great strength and energy to the Polish Presidency.

The debate is closed.

Written statements (Rule 149)

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), in writing. – (PT) The Polish Presidency of the Council of the European Union took place in one of the most critical periods for the EU, when the terms ‘implosion’, ‘disintegration’ and ‘two-speed Europe’ have kept cropping up in the media. The many challenges that emerged demonstrated the commitment and dynamism of the Polish Presidency in deepening European integration in the face of certain Member States relapsing back into nationalism. Targets achieved by the Presidency in the area of transport included new guidelines on trans-European networks, the Connecting Europe Facility and the linking of these instruments with third countries, particularly our partners in the East. The first document on tourism was adopted, in which Parliament extolled the importance of this sector to Europe’s economy. Negotiations on the next financial framework and on post-2013 cohesion policy were also issues debated by this Presidency. However, it is in the economic sphere, in creating genuine European economic governance and in financial supervision, that Poland has played a prominent role during debate and negotiations with the Member States, notably on adopting the ‘six-pack’. In spite of its efforts, many of its objectives were not achieved. Nevertheless, the Polish Government’s efforts should be stressed.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), in writing. – (SK) When the EU Presidency was held by the first two countries from the Visegrád Group – the Czech Republic and Hungary – I kept my fingers crossed for them. Unfortunately, their presidencies did not avoid problems which tainted their successes. Despite the escalating crisis, however, the Polish Presidency has been an unambiguous success story. Many people were surprised that, in a time of crisis, with national egoisms coming to the fore, the Poles have been demonstrably pro-European. One proof of this was the recent speech by Polish Foreign Minister Radoslav Sikorski in Germany. I believe it will go down in history as the speech of a statesman calling for a federal Europe. He directly addressed German politicians and graphically described to them the danger threatening the EU if it is not united. I would like to applaud the Poles for having the courage to talk about a common budgetary, immigration and foreign policy. Another important point I would like to underline from Mr Sikorski’s speech is that the crisis in the EU was decidedly not caused by the expansion eastwards. Although I do not agree with the Polish minister about the cause of the crisis – in his view, it was the lack of budgetary discipline, and in my view it was macro-economic imbalances – I applaud him for tackling the myths that prevail in certain sections of society in our western neighbours. I believe the Polish Presidency will set an example to all of the ones that follow, and that the Council will thus become a much more pro-European institution. I would once again like to thank the Polish representatives.

  Richard Falbr (S&D), in writing. – (CS) I firmly believe that the Polish Presidency has ended in success, and that its results are in sharp contrast with what was achieved by the Czech and Hungarian Presidencies. The Poles have also coped very well with the very challenging situation that has come about in the EU, and what I like best is that, after years of harmony between their erstwhile leaders and Europe’s gravedigger, Václav Klaus, they have transformed into a strikingly pro-European power.

  Tunne Kelam (PPE), in writing. – I am especially grateful to the Polish Presidency for its commitment to the EU strategy for the Baltic Sea region. Probably for the first time, the Polish Government presented, before its Presidency, detailed plans on how to coordinate and enforce further implementation of the EU SBSR. I invite the Polish Presidency to encourage the other two members of the Presidency trio, especially Denmark, to continue their commitment. It is important to better coordinate the implementation of the first EU macro-regional strategy both by the EU Council and the Commission. One other option will be a rotating Presidency, on the basis of which each of the eight Baltic Sea Member States would take responsibility for a certain period for the coordination of the strategy with the aim of achieving added value and concentrating on synergy and regional projects instead of splitting the projects between nationally-orientated shopping lists. Poland has achieved, with honour, one of its major goals, announced in July. The accession negotiations with Croatia have been concluded successfully and on time. Against the background of continuing economic crisis, the prospect of Croatia soon becoming the 28th Member State sends a message of hope to the other Balkan countries as to the continuing enlargement process.

  Lena Kolarska-Bobińska (PPE), in writing. – (PL) The Polish Presidency has been efficient, professional and important for Poland and Europe. The crisis in the euro area has now lasted for over 700 days and during our Presidency, we entered one of its most difficult phases. The meeting of Prime Ministers held in December to rescue the euro area ended with moderate success. We still have more questions than answers, but it has proved possible to resist the Franco-German Directory.

Thanks to Polish efforts, too, the Union has not split into the countries of the euro area and the rest. It continues as a structure of ‘27 minus’, or 27 Member States minus the United Kingdom. Before the Presidency, Poland was known in Europe chiefly as a country which was receiving a great deal of money from European funds and was against action to fight climate change. Now, Poland’s European identity has become clear and distinct. Poland supports and will support a strong, united Europe; a Europe which unites, not divides.

  Ádám Kósa (PPE), in writing. – (HU) In a speech I gave six months ago at the beginning of the Polish Presidency, I stated that Central Europe has never been so much in the centre of the EU, and that we must prove that the enlargement of the European Union was a success. I believe that we succeeded in this, and that both Hungary and Poland successfully met the challenge, of which we can all be proud. It was also at that time that I requested that the Polish Presidency pay attention to people with disabilities. During the previous Presidency trio (Spain-Belgium-Hungary), this issue had special priority. My concerns were sadly not unfounded, as the Polish Presidency did not continue the work previously started in this field. To me, this is unacceptable. I hope that the Danish Presidency will right this deficiency. I believe that 80 million disabled people deserve to be treated as a special priority by any Presidency.

  Jan Kozłowski (PPE), in writing. – (PL) The Polish Presidency came at a very difficult time and posed many challenges. Despite this, and also in spite of the fact that it was Poland’s first Presidency, I consider its results to be very positive. I would like to thank the Presidency in particular for its consistent work to develop the Eastern Partnership, including its organisation of the Partnership’s first summit. Europe today needs stable partners who are united by good relations as neighbours. I hope, too, that one of the Presidency’s initiatives – the Fund for Democracy – will be effective in supporting democratic change both in the East and in the South. In addition, I would like to emphasise the Presidency’s positive contribution in achieving a difficult compromise on the budget for 2012, and also to express my regard for its effectiveness in work on the future of integrated maritime policy and in drafting the Council conclusions on volunteering.

  Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), in writing. – (ES) I congratulate the Polish Presidency on its work over the six months. I also congratulate its Foreign Affairs Minister on his significant pro-European speech in Berlin and, as rapporteur for the Observatory on intellectual property, I thank him for his constant support.

I am sorry that my report will not be voted on in plenary until February but I also want to thank the Presidency for striving to overcome severe problems in the area of political asylum.

I wish it every success for 2016, when it will host the Capital of Culture, and I hope, in the same pro-European and cultural spirit that has guided this Presidency and that I would have liked to have shared with Oviedo, my city, that we can build a project of civic unity.

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE), in writing. – (PL) It is good that the Polish Presidency came just at this difficult time of crisis and weakening of the unity of the EU, because it is Poland which has the greatest experience in fighting a crisis by making profound political, organisational and structural reforms. This experience, this approach and the courage to make reforms are needed today in Europe. The Community spirit referred to by Mr Barroso is an interesting combination of ideas. Yes, we need spirit and we need a sense of community. It is a formulation which expresses the need of the present time in Europe, but let us remember that this Community spirit is needed most of all by many national governments, because only then will it spread to society in the Member States. Creating unity in Europe is a complex social and economic process, because Europe was and still is characterised by a high degree of differentiation.

For our reforms to be effective, it is necessary to identify accurately the causes of the crisis and analyse the effects of the processes of globalisation and the mistakes we have made at EU and national level. I will give just one example. Why did we not keep to the Stability and Growth Pact, which, after all, has applied to all Member States for many years? Who broke it? Why was the economic system in the Member States not monitored? Who is responsible for these errors?

  Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), in writing. – (PL) I am pleased to be able to add my voice to the expressions of esteem for the Polish Presidency. Among the many successes to which reference has been made here today, mention must also be made of two events which relate to the area of my closest interests: completion of work and adoption of the directive on the European Protection Order and the directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. I commend these achievements, because for many people, the European Protection Order is not just the assurance of a uniform level of security as part of the free movement of people within the European Union, but is, above all, the chance to go to another country and live a normal life without being afraid, while the protection of children – the most vulnerable of people – from that repulsive and highly injurious form of abuse which is of a sexual nature is, I think, a matter of great importance to us all. For this reason, the value of this instrument for legal protection is beyond dispute.

I am also optimistic in relation to the words of Mr Tusk about shared European values. Particularly at such a difficult time, it is important to be clear in declaring support for a shared future for Europe and to take the necessary action which results consistently from this declaration. I think the Polish Presidency has shown the right course for further action and for how the European Union should operate, and I hope that during future presidencies, this course will be continued, thanks to which we will be able to overcome the economic crisis.

  Csanád Szegedi (NI), in writing. – (HU) The nations of Poland and Hungary share a centuries old history of friendship. No wonder, as before the most unjust diktat in world history, the tragedy of Trianon, Hungary and Poland were neighbouring countries. With reference to this shared historic legacy, I respectfully ask the Polish Government to do everything within its power in the few days which remain from its term of EU Presidency to ensure that the Hungarians of the Carpathian Basin are free to live out their national identity, and to guarantee especially in Slovakia the free use of the Hungarian language for those Hungarians living in the historic region of Upper Hungary. I wish our Polish friends all the best for their work.

  Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), in writing. – (HU) During the term of the Polish Presidency, we made considerable progress in respect of both the enlargement of the European Union and the deepening of integration. In September, we reached an agreement on the legislative ‘six-pack’ that serves for the deepening of EU economic governance. In December, the Accession Treaty of Croatia was signed, and a decision was adopted on the commencement of accession negotiations with Montenegro in the following year. I hope that in February, we will see a decision granting candidate status to Serbia as well. The Polish Presidency has been able to use the excellent professional preparatory work of the Hungarian EU Presidency as the foundation of its achievements. The Hungarian Presidency managed to reach a consensus on almost every aspect of economic governance, and it was also during the Hungarian Presidency that Croatia’s accession negotiations were concluded. With Hungary, it was the professional work that was successful, whereas the Poles demonstrated a clear commitment to the European Union. They did not make eurosceptic statements as Viktor Orbán did on multiple occasions. While the Polish Government aimed at national consensus in respect of the EU Presidency, a willingness to cooperate that could also be observed at Brussels fora, the Hungarian Government chose its term of EU Presidency to adopt a media law that restricts the freedom of speech and a new one-party basic law that prejudices the rule of law. The deteriorating international reputation of the Hungarian Government cast a shadow on the professional achievements of its Presidency.

  Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein (PPE), in writing. – I have heard words of praise from many quarters for the Polish Presidency which has been characterised by professionalism and enthusiasm. This Presidency, in extremely challenging circumstances, managed to push forward many concrete solutions of immediate benefit to citizens.

The Presidency focused on the positive message of EU integration. Nowhere was this more evident than in the area of the single market. Achieving a truly barrier-free internal market could increase EU GDP by 4%. The Presidency enthusiastically co-organised the first Single Market Forum in Kraków in October with the Commission and Parliament. Over 1 300 citizens attended to discuss the challenges facing the single market and how to overcome them. The information stands on Kraków’s market square were visited by 7 000 people – informing them of the rights and opportunities granted by this, Europe’s single greatest asset.

The Presidency should also be commended for the progress made in negotiations on some very important dossiers which will greatly contribute to the effective functioning of the single market such as the unitary patent and the roaming regulation. I am proud of Poland’s hard work on behalf of the EU’s 500 million citizens and I wish the Danes success for the first half of 2012.

IN THE CHAIR: RODI KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU
Vice-President