Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, I will start by asking for your indulgence, as I am going to do something I have never done before and leave the Chamber immediately after my speech. The reason for this is that, contrary to what it had agreed with me, Turkish television has announced that Mr Watson and I will be available for a discussion starting at 5 p.m.. Not wishing to give the wrong political impression, I will go and do it, although I do not otherwise comply with requests of this sort if they have not been agreed in advance. Let us turn, though, to Copenhagen: from Copenhagen to Copenhagen! I wish the summit of Heads of State and Government under Danish presidency great success, in order that we may tackle the issues that remain to be resolved. This summit in Copenhagen must become a summit for enlargement. We must not end up in a situation in which Turkey is the sole topic for discussion. Turkey may well be important, but Copenhagen must send out a signal that the peoples of Central Europe, plus Malta and Cyprus, are joining the community of values that is the European Union. That must stand centre-stage. Copenhagen must consummate the historic process of the 1980s and 1990s, and, to that end, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, we wish you much success! I can endorse wholeheartedly what has been said on behalf of the Commission, both by President Prodi and by Commissioner Verheugen, both of whom, as well as the President-in-Office of the Council, I wish to thank for the work they have done. Speaking on behalf of our group, I would also like to remind you that, even if the Danish proposal is accepted, we still have EUR 2.391 billion in hand, on the assumption that the figure, to which Commissioner Verheugen referred, is correct. We should be counting every euro, and, as President Prodi will be aware, I am very much in favour of stability, but the outcome of Copenhagen must not be that the whole enlargement project is deferred for lack of agreement on the financial issues. We therefore call on the governments to achieve a result in Copenhagen. I would think it a tragedy, ladies and gentlemen, if we ended up without an agreement with Poland, a country that was at the heart of change in Europe – I do not want to recapitulate the historical circumstances all over again; I have done it often enough – and if we ended up without an agreement with Poland, the country to which, along with others of course, we owe the great change in Europe. Hence the demand that the Heads of State and Government should do something now and make a result possible. And now for Turkey. Ladies and gentlemen, the European Court of Justice is fifty years old today; at any rate, it was fifty years ago that it was convened for the first time, on 4 December 1952. The law matters to us. There are criteria for accession, and they include such things as the law. We cannot, then, take certain things – all of which are important but have nothing to do with the criteria as such – as reasons for now naming a date for negotiations with Turkey, even though the criteria have in no way been met! We firmly reject the idea that Copenhagen should name a date for negotiations! Ladies and gentlemen, I say this in full awareness of the fact – which I do not conceal and have never sought to conceal – that there are within our group widely divergent views on whether or not Turkey should be a member. Some are very strongly in favour of Turkish membership, while others advocate a strategic or privileged partnership. This is indeed normal in a large group, and I am sure that other groups differ but little. We are not talking only about Turkey, however, when we agree, absolutely and 100%, that it would breach our own requirements and be in contravention of them, if we were now to throw overboard what we have defined as conditions for the commencement of negotiations. What will be the image of the European Union if pressure is exerted over the Cyprus issue, if we are told that, if there is no date right now, the Cyprus issue will not be resolved? We are becoming susceptible to extortion! I therefore recommend that we rely on the firm foundations of European law and criteria. The Commission has pointed us in the right direction; we are not opening any negotiations right now, because the criteria have not been fulfilled, and, on this, our group has no reservations whatever in following the Commission's lead. What I expect of the Council Presidency, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, is that you too take your stand on the basis of the criteria and of what has hitherto been agreed in the Community of Fifteen. If you take a different line, our assessment of the Danish Presidency's achievements will be less favourable than it has been so far. Nor do we accept the way in which the United States of America is trying to exert influence; whilst they have the right to bring influence to bear, it is influence and pressure to which we shall not yield! Now, I am also aware that there are countries in the European Union that lag behind others; in particular, that there is a major EU country that needs to make up for lost time in its solidarity with America, and this country is therefore susceptible to pressure. For us, as a friend and partner of America, the pressure of no consequence whatever, as we are following our own principles, and so what we say to our American partners and friends is this: You can make recommendations to us, but we will act in accordance with our own convictions! We now hear from Turkey that the Cyprus issue will not be resolved if they are not given a date. We had a clear basis, to which the President-in-Office of the Council referred: if the Cyprus issue is not resolved within the framework of a federation of both parts of the island, then what had previously been resolved by the European Union will apply, and the whole island – but in reality only its Greek part – will become a member. I have one further comment to make to the Commission on the post-1 May 2004 order. Our recommendation to the Council and to the Commission is that no decision, whether anticipatory or otherwise, should be taken without reference to Parliament. We are prepared to be flexible in any way that will be appropriate, but what you can depend on is that we will always defend Parliament's rights. It is on this basis that we seek good cooperation with all the institutions of the European Union. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE