Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, when dealing with this subject we must also inevitably return to the events in Genoa. We shall of course deal with the violation of civil rights later. This evening, I would like to touch upon the protest of ten thousand, predominantly young, people against globalisation and economic power. We must take more seriously than before their concerns surrounding the increasing division in the world between the rich and the poor and the exploitation of our natural resources. Precisely because many problems can no longer be resolved at a national level, the European Union is specifically responsible for monitoring unbridled economic and financial dealings. Up until now, the European Union has pursued this aim very hesitantly. One of several possibilities open to us is to establish the legal base for employee participation, information and consultation before decisions are taken. The European limited liability company – really an inevitable idea, and also a sensible idea in itself, within the European internal market – is however only acceptable to us as European Socialists with the appropriate inclusion of employees and their trade unions. Company decisions are therefore only really thought out if employees’ points of view are considered. Management alone cannot make important decisions. The numerous failed mergers and events at Renault Vilvoorde, Danone, Marks [amp] Spencer and in other companies in the past are, in our opinion, good evidence of this. Additionally, I would like to thank the French government for reaching a compromise and for also finally convincing Spain that this legislation must be given the green light. I would like to criticise the procedure decided on by the Council. In this regard, I share the criticism of the Committee on Legal Affairs. However, I would like to say, Mr Lehne, that I did not find the reasons you gave very convincing, since the Council has, of course, been able to count on the support of Parliament. We have also pursued this procedure rapidly and constructively in the course of the Committee’s work. It is not because of us that the procedure would have failed. So, there was essentially no reason to change the legal base. I share the criticism and think that the Council should consider this carefully and also stipulate their reasoning, for we have not, to date, actually heard the reason for changing the legal base. I would like to extend my thanks to Mr Menrad for working rapidly and constructively with us in the Committee on Social Affairs to bring this report to the vote. I would also like to thank him for being more specific in response to proposals from my group. However, I believe, Mr Menrad, that we are agreed that we must not adopt Amendment No 12. I have at any rate recommended this to my group. Finally, I would refer to the appeal to secure a majority of votes tomorrow to enable this ship – as one member put it – to be launched on its maiden voyage, despite some reservations and also in spite of some inconsistencies, which we could not allow to go unmentioned. I think, however, that it would be sensible to bring in a law that takes employees into consideration and includes their interests in time for the introduction of the euro. The planned revision does not need to be deferred for six years. We can certainly carry this out earlier.

Political group: PSE