Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to say firstly that I find it very regrettable that the other half of the budgetary authority is not present today. It would certainly be right and proper for the Council to attend these debates. Even though we had a debate on the general principles of the Budget at our last plenary part-session, it would certainly be fitting for them also to be present when we get down to brass tacks – and at Parliament's first reading we really do get down to brass tacks. In this respect I am very pleased that we have tabled an amendment which, at least initially, places the funds for the increase in Council staff in the reserve and asks a few more questions. I hope that this amendment will also be supported by a sufficient majority. It is linked to conditions which the Council can fulfil by the end of the year so as not to jeopardise enlargement. I actually wanted to start by thanking the Council for making this morning's Solidarity Fund event such a success and for enabling us to reach an agreement. In this context, however, I hope that the Member States concerned, and in particular the German Government, will now also announce their figures quickly. We have all made every effort to meet the budgetary conditions. We have now met both. We have Budget lines, we have a legal base, and now all we need is money. If the Commission is still waiting for information in this respect I find it more than shameful. It is the end of October and it actually ought to be available. I should like to highlight just a few points, because my fellow group members have already addressed a number of issues. First, a fundamental comment: it is increasingly clear that the decisions made by the Heads of State and Government in March 1999 on Agenda 2000 and the financial perspective up to 2006 were a wish list of items, which may have been sensible in 1999 but which are no longer relevant to the challenges currently facing the Union. I should like to illustrate this using just two figures: if we are able, according to the financial perspective, to spend EUR 42 billion on the agricultural policy but can, after considerable effort, only scrape together a final total of EUR 47 million for common activities under the Common Foreign and Security Policy then this shows an imbalance in our political priorities. Europe's activities in Category 4, in particular its support for the peace process in neighbouring countries – an important task whereby we must help to transfer our European legacy of peace to other regions – are on very, very shaky ground. The decisions that were made in March 1999 do not help us to meet these obligations in the long term. I hope that something can be done here – we have of course tabled various amendments in an effort to shore up this work – and that we will at last be given a better chance to do justice to this important task which is incumbent on the European Union in the twenty-first century. Allow me to address a second issue, one on which I also ask for the support of Members from the other groups. We have tabled an amendment stating that, in the work on the trans-European networks, special attention should be paid to eliminating bottlenecks to the enlargement countries. I would be delighted if a majority of this House could support this. We cannot have a situation where enlargement cannot at the end of the day take place in practice. It will admittedly happen on paper, but without the necessary infrastructure it will not be able to take place in economic terms. The Community is called on to act here. We are doing a great deal for those countries wishing to join us, but we must redouble our efforts.

Political group: PPE-DE