Mr President, in March 2000, the Lisbon European Council set out a new strategy for the coming decade. At that time we were working on the basis of very optimistic economic data and really thought that we could bring about sustainable growth of at least 3%, along with economic reform, full employment and also social inclusion. Today our starting point is more difficult because the global economy has gone in the opposite direction and even the European Union, despite its readiness to reform and the reforms which it has already implemented, is experiencing an economic downturn. That is why the following question is now much more urgent than it was during the preparations for the first spring summit in Stockholm: how does the Commission intend to continue this ambitious process of making the European Union, on the basis of innovation and knowledge, the most dynamic and competitive economic area in the world, and enabling it to overcome the problems which I have described? This question is all the more pertinent for the spring summit in Barcelona because, after evaluating a strategy of this kind for two years, it ought to be possible to identify the areas where national and European policy have actually been guided by the quantitative and qualitative objectives and see to what extent it has been possible to bundle measures together and make them visible. The Member States' budgets have actually shown uniform increases across the board in investment in research and development, innovation and further development of the information and communication society. The few figures which are available to us in the European Parliament unfortunately do not yet speak the specific language which we would have liked, because we had hoped that the Lisbon strategy and its consistent implementation would also have yielded visible added value as a result of economic, financial, employment and social policy being coordinated at European level, so as to demonstrate to the public the benefits which European policy can have for them and quite specifically how it can improve their quality of life and work. We should certainly also ask what approach has been adopted to achieve the ambitious aim of increasing investment in the European Union. How has cross-border investment in infrastructure actually been made visible apart from through reports? The European Parliament needs to ask all of these questions because, in drafting its synthesis report, the Commission has the duty of actually producing a blueprint for the further consultations at the spring summit, which will then, of course, in the end, form the broad guidelines of the future economic policy of the European Union and its Member States. In the current economic downturn and at a time when we are also facing particular challenges because of the adverse economic consequences of the terrible terrorist acts of 11 September – and in considering these issues we have to take into account a new aspect, the collapse of consumer confidence – we must also ask ourselves the following question: what can we do to stop a self-fulfilling prophecy, which states that we are sliding into recession, from becoming a reality? The Commission therefore bears great responsibility for taking more of a lead on setting targets and taking more practical action to reform the economy, not only with respect to the labour market, but also with respect to the other markets, full employment and also social inclusion, by issuing specific guidance on these areas. Of course this also raises the question, and I should also like to address this particularly to you, Commissioner, of whether the tax situation, where unfortunately we still have countries pursuing independent national policies rather than coordinated ones, does not have an adverse impact on investment in the European Union and, in particular, on cross-border investment. Commissioner, the European Parliament is still not clear about how it is actually, finally to be involved in this whole process, which is now approaching its second spring summit. So far we have not been involved as partners in the macro-economic dialogue. There are no plans to organise another forum with all of the stakeholders, as was done before the Lisbon meeting. It really is legitimate to ask whether the European Parliament's involvement is adequate and whether it is therefore able to represent the interests of the people in this process of setting priorities for the European Union's economic and structural policy. We really are in a situation where we need to mobilise our forces and rally optimism. How do you envisage doing this in your synthesis report? What working methods do you intend to choose and which guidelines do you intend to issue in it?

Political group: PSE