Madam President, Commissioner, I would firstly like to warmly congratulate Mrs Roth-Behrendt on having made progress on this difficult directive and particularly on the manner in which she has done so. During this legislature, I have had the opportunity to debate many issues, some of them genuinely difficult and complicated, but perhaps in none of them have I seen so much desire to reach consensus through cooperation amongst all the agents involved as in the case of the rapporteur on this directive. I do not believe that this has been a debate based on the positions of the different political groups, in confrontation; it has essentially been a debate between stagnation and progress in an area on which the European Parliament has for years maintained a united and coherent position, with a view of the issues which differs from that of the cosmetics industry and, on several fundamental points, also from that of the Commission itself. Parliament had a clear view of what it wanted: to set time limits for the end of experimentation on animals, and of the marketing of products experimented on them and, furthermore, to improve the general framework of the legislation regulating these products in the Member States. For its part, the industry initially maintained the same position of rejecting these requests which Parliament had been defending for years, which made the application of the sixth amendment of the directive unviable. The rapporteur has already mentioned the long process of debate and joint work between the parliamentary groups with the industry, the Commission and also with the competent administrations of the Member States and finally a compromise was achieved last November following an extremely long conciliation which, if I remember correctly, lasted twelve hours. I genuinely believe that there are no losers in relation to this issue. I am convinced that the industry is also a winner with the new commitments on prohibition, experimentation and marketing of six years from the entry into force of the directive. And this is essentially because they will be better able to serve the interests of the citizens in the field of animal protection, without in any way also undermining the safety or diversity, of course, of the products on the market. In this regard, one of the most difficult parts of the work on this directive has been managing to establish the field of exceptions through the definition of tests which, for a period of ten years in specific and essential cases where no alternative methods have been found, will still be able to be carried out. Another element which increases the safety of products is the prohibition of dangerous substances such as those which are carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic for reproduction which must be excluded from cosmetics. I am convinced that this seventh amendment offers the industry a new range of opportunities for research and development of new products, which, while guaranteeing their effectiveness and above all their safety, will need to be tested on animals. I believe this is a great challenge for the industry, which I would encourage to seek new sources of competitive advantage through this research and to initiate, with interest and good will, close cooperation with this Parliament. I believe that the European Parliament not only can and must communicate that this seventh amendment is a success, but also it would be a mistake for the industry not to take this opportunity to draw up a new communication strategy based on the agreements reached and on its position in favour of the concerns of the consumers, not only with regard to animal experimentation, but also, as we have seen, with regard to other points of the directive which imply greater control of the marketing of these products. Finally, I would like once again to highlight the issue of cooperation between the parties involved, in particular the eventual, it is true, but positive, flexibility of the Member States and the industry which has led to this final agreement.

Political group: PPE-DE