Mr President, I fear that I must disappoint Mr Trakatellis, something that is relatively easy when he hopes that the members of the Convention are now listening and will suddenly start regarding health policy as a priority. I do not believe that they will. Having listened attentively to Mr Byrne and Mr Trakatellis, I agree with them, and, whilst much of what they have referred to is of course necessary, what we have done so far is not enough. The European system for the epidemiological monitoring and control of communicable diseases that we already have can only be as good, in terms of quality, reliability and speed, as the national systems, and these differ in every respect. That is why I agree with you that we should set up a scientific research centre. That, though, will be but a drop in the ocean. I am sure that you, Mr Trakatellis, want more research, and equally sure that Mrs Malliori will endorse that, but that is not what we really need. The European Union has hitherto specifically excluded the possibility of harmonising legislation. It is specifically laid down in our system for combating communicable diseases that national legislation will not be harmonised. You stated earlier, Commissioner, that the most important thing now is prevention, that we must, for example, reduce encounters with certain diseases and exposure to them. What about if plague returns to Europe or breaks out again anywhere? What about if polio, infantile paralysis, again becomes widespread? Are we prepared for those eventualities? I can tell you plainly that, no, we are not prepared. An epidemiological system that results, for example, in it being recommended in some countries – but not in others – that one should not travel to certain regions, and in observation being carried out at airports in some European Union countries, but with nothing of the kind being done in others, is no use whatever. So I have to tell you, very plainly, that the only thing we have to do – although we all have to agree on it – is to incorporate in the Treaty a competence for health policy. Mr Trakatellis, I would be the first to applaud enthusiastically if you were to get your group to accept that. I have not read any great number of statements on the Convention in which that desire was expressed, and I am quite certain that Mrs Grossetête has not either, but as for you, Mr Poettering – and I see that you are listening – do you say that there has to be a Community competence for health policy? We are eager to find out! It might well not have done so at the highest level, but my group has clearly stated that we want no more centres serving as alibis. The European Union is meant to have proper competences to deal with such problems. What will we be saying to people at next year's European elections? Do we really have equal standards – at least minimum standards – of hygiene, which enable us to fight disease and beat it? You asked, Mr Trakatellis, whether people in hospitals can get even more ill. They can indeed, because we have no comparability between hospitals' standards of hygiene. Is that the European Union that we want our citizens to live in? No! We want not just competition and the internal market, but also social security and health care. So far, we have not achieved them. If we now take this case, of SARS, as an example and want to make something of it, we must succeed in gaining a mandatory competence at European Union level for health policy. I ask you, Mr Byrne, as a matter of urgency, to support us in this and bring our need for a Community competence to the ears of the Commission and Mr Prodi – who has always told us that he has an ear open to the soul of the people, something that the examples of the European Food Agency and the Food Safety Authority have brought to our notice. Mr Byrne, I will support you if, in the forthcoming Budget debates, you demand more personnel and double your budget estimate. When it comes to summoning up the courage to do that, though, you are on your own. (Applause)

Political group: PSE