Madam President, Madam President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, the Socialist Group has requested this debate for two reasons. The first is because the conclusions and work of the G8 summit were obscured because the debate concentrated on public order. I must especially thank Mr Vitorino for having talked to us about the results of a summit whose agenda was set by a government, that of Olivo, in Italy, and which was discussed in the European Parliament – Mr Tajani, you were engaged in a municipal campaign, but it was discussed here – and, furthermore, we have asked for a resolution on this debate which has been replied to and denied by the PPE. We do not understand why they want to speak but refuse a resolution. However, in any event, ladies and gentlemen, what I would like to point out is that we clearly said that the President of the Commission and the President of the Council were in the Genoa photo and we regret that they have not had time to come to this debate if they considered it so important. And I must point out that some positive advances have been made. Commissioner Vitorino has referred to them. I would say that, on the cancellation of debt, little progress has been made. The fund for AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis is a positive step, although it is still not enough. Africa must be a priority; also the desire for flexibility in the TRIPs Agreements and the ‘everything but arms’ initiative as well as the extension of the system of generalised preferences are aspects which we Europeans should be proud of and should value more. In addition to this there is our firm position on Kyoto which, despite United States resistance, has allowed us to reach a solution in Bonn. I believe that as a Parliament we must bring this to account and hold a debate because, furthermore, my political family, the , which is a member of the Socialist International – we are internationalists and we have been globalised since the Nineteenth Century – is an organisation which is present in 160 countries in the world, and is not just an organisation of white men, that is to say, it is an organisation of all continents. Therefore, the issue of globalisation which, at our last congress of the International in Paris, two years ago, led to a resolution on the challenges of globalisation, must be, as far as we are concerned, a permanent element of European policy. Lastly, a comment on issues of public order. My group has said, from the outset, that it is awaiting the conclusion of the investigation which is being carried out in the Italian Parliament on these issues, because we respect the Parliament of an important democracy which is a member of the European Union. This does not prevent us from demonstrating a very critical position in relation to the rights of European citizens contained in the Charter of Fundamental Rights. There are no public order policies which restrict citizens – and I say this to the Belgian Presidency – in their right to demonstrate and give vent to their feelings. A responsible public order policy must guarantee those rights, not repress them. Just as football cannot be prohibited because of fights between hooligans, rights cannot be restricted because there are nuclei of provocative vandals. A final request, Madam President, Madam President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen: to mention civil society has become so commonplace that it is almost impossible to make a political speech without talking about it. But what I cannot understand is that people talk about speaking with civil society and then they put a comma and say, ‘and with Parliament, of course’. Society becomes civil when it elects its representatives and therefore the first duty of the President of the Council and the President of the Commission, when they go to these summits, is to come to Parliament and report on them.

Political group: PSE