Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, following the same line as Mrs Maij-Weggen, I believe that we have a number of representatives here who all feel passionate about contributing to this debate. The topic touches the very core of the European Union. Let me begin by specifying precisely what we are debating. Article 178, Title XX of the consolidated Treaties of the European Union reads as follows: “The Community shall take account of the objectives referred to in Article 177 in the policies that it implements which are likely to affect developing countries”. What are the objectives which each EU policy needs to take into account? Article 177 specifies these objectives as “sustainable economic and social development of the developing countries, and more particularly the most disadvantaged among them”, the “smooth and gradual integration of the developing countries into the world economy and the campaign against poverty in the developing countries”. Mr President, these are no arbitrary objectives. These are articles, statutory articles, which form part of the European acquis established by law with which the European institutions and Member States must comply. Every statutory article should, of course, not just be judged on its regularity, but also on the importance of its contents. I am of the opinion – and luckily I am not alone in this – that the principle of policy coherence is essential to every government which aims to be a credible servant of its citizens. The interests of the citizens are only served by a credible and reliable government. This is important if the government wants to gain the trust of society, and also important from the point of view of effectiveness, for coherence is required in order to use the restricted means efficiently. We should not make reality out to be more rose-tinted than it really is. Reality is obstinate. It is up to the government to deal with this fact in a transparent and open manner, without any backhandedness. The government is obliged to show up any of its dilemmas, and to show where, when and why, problems occur with coherence of policy, rather than sweeping it all under the carpet. What we are talking about here today is not an issue which can be toyed with at leisure. Poverty in the third world is a harrowing problem that demands urgent attention. It is only natural that we in Parliament guard the interests of our citizens, but it is also in the interest of our citizens to live in a stable, international environment, in which the goal of human safety is pursued. This is a moral interest, a safety interest and is, ultimately, even in the interest of our economy. In whose interest is it really if European taxpayers’ money is used to support economic development in Namibia, and if, at the same time, the economic activity of poor cattle farmers in the same country is drastically undercut by rigorous export subsidies, financed by the same tax payers? We are all acting as if this is not really happening, but we all know that it is. It is not our task as MEPs to adopt an ostrich policy and bury our heads in the sand. The general interest of policy coherence is, therefore, a responsibility of the Commission as a whole, of the Council, and of the European Parliament. This responsibility cannot only be borne by the Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid, however much we like to see him or hear him talk, or by the Development Council or the parliamentary Committee on Development and Cooperation. What we need here is an integral approach. After the lucid and closely reasoned explanation of this approach presented by both Mr Amado and Mr Nielson, I would like to note that we are very much looking forward to the proposals, not only by Mr Nielson, but by the entire Commission, in order to make the policy coherent as a whole. This is why we urge the Commission, in this sharp and clear resolution, to develop specific instruments. We need to pinpoint, and draw up an inventory of, the problem areas for coherence. We need to make it evident which problems we are solving and which we have not yet solved. This is why I advocate a monitoring centre for coherence which makes this apparent. This is why we need to set up inter-service task groups in the Commission, in the Council and in Parliament which can police the attainment of coherence. Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, if our neighbour’s roof is leaking, we can lend him pots and pans to collect the water, but it is, of course, more effective to help him plug the leak in the roof. The crisis in last year’s Commission has been solved today, but the Commission must now produce a policy in which we get full support for a coherent approach, which, no doubt, the entire Parliament will soon demand in the resolution. I would wish the Commissioner all the best in his battle within the Commission and wish Mr Amado the same within the Council.

Political group: PSE