Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Europe has always been successful when it has been ambitious. The euro was one of those ambitions, which is providing increasing benefits for citizens. After thirteen months in actual physical existence, the euro has become the equal of the dollar, and is already the second reserve currency in the world. Since the European Central Bank has been managing monetary policy, the rate of inflation in the euro zone has remained lower than the American and British rates of inflation. Long term interest rates are at an historic low in Europe and lower than in the United States. By pointing out these facts, I am standing against the prevailing euro-scepticism and against the tendency for self-punishment among many of our colleagues. It is true that Europe has problems: growth has slowed down, some large Member States have mounting deficits and unemployment is rising again. However, which region in the world does not have problems? We are told that Europe is suffering as a result of its lack of flexibility and structural deficiencies due to social overprotection. We are given the example of an American economy which is reportedly more productive and which, thanks to a more flexible labour market, is said to create more jobs. So what do we see? American unemployment is higher than in the vast majority of European Member States. What is more, the American unemployment rate does not count the two million Americans of working age who are in prison. However there is something more important: productivity per hour is greater in Europe than in the United States, which is evidence of greater efficiency of production and services in Europe. This efficiency is reflected in international trade, in which the Union is selling nearly twice the volume of American exports. The United States are accumulating other deficits. Currently, if the federal budget deficit were evaluated according to the criteria of the Stability and Growth Pact, it would be between 5% and 6% of the United States GDP. The reason that I am pointing out these figures is not in order to gloat about them, as the United States are an essential driving force in the world economy. Europe could take over, as long as it equips itself with the resources to support its ambitions. The Lisbon Strategy is an ambition that will incite action, but the Member States will have to finally get behind implementing this joint strategy defined in Lisbon and Gothenburg. The Commission should ensure that all the Member States keep to this strategy as a whole, and not only to a few structural reforms, which are necessary but not sufficient to create the most competitive knowledge and ‘well-being’ based society in the world. In this context, Europe needs to rethink its investment strategy. In 1970, Europe used 4.2% of its GDP for public investments. Now we have dropped that figure to 2.3%. I am of the opinion that stability is essential for fighting inflation and public deficits. It also helps towards defending the purchasing power of the poorest in our societies. However, in order to have greater growth, we need to invest in infrastructures, research and the knowledge-based society. We also need to distinguish between investment expenditure and operation expenditure. Mr President, I will conclude by saying that I have tried to give an optimistic message. However, if war were necessary, we would all have to take another look. One of the first victims of this war will certainly be the Stability and Growth Pact, unless Europe refuses to sacrifice growth and employment on the altar of the gods of war. We therefore need to work to prevent this war in order to preserve growth and employment. (Applause)

Political group: PSE