Madam President, thanks are indeed due for the great job that has been done. It seems to me that there is good reason to rejoice today, and I can indeed see happy faces around me. Mr Fogh Rasmussen is happy, Mr Haarder is happy, and Mr Prodi, we hope, is also happy. Mr Verheugen has every reason to be pleased with the great job he has done. The candidate countries should also be pleased with the tremendous job they have done. I think that this can perhaps get forgotten. While standing here welcoming the fact that a little country can achieve so much, it is possible to be struck by the notion that this could be a tip as to how to structure the leadership of the EU. It would perhaps be better to entrust the Presidency to the small countries and let the large ones attend to the battles they are fighting elsewhere. This, however, is of course a little, humble wish for the future on the part of my country. (Applause) As regards all of the good ideas as to what my country should do with regard to the euro, for example, I would say that, if you can get the Stability and Growth Pact to work, Denmark may well consider them. At the moment, I do not think that there is any reason to. In my opinion it is not working, and I think that it is true that Mr Fogh Rasmussen has managed better than the euro. It is of course galling for me that it is a liberal government that is receiving the praise, but the truth has to be told: you have managed well, Mr Fogh Rasmussen. We have now heard enough historical speeches, and it is perhaps time to get going: not with history, but with the future. Enlargement has been a success, but we all know, of course, that things will not get any easier. Enlargement will not make it any easier to work in the European Union. There are many things that will become considerably more difficult, but it would have been worse if we had not prepared enlargement. This is the other side of the coin. For example, it will not become any easier to carry out agricultural reform, but it is even more necessary than before. I would of course urge both Denmark and the upcoming Presidency to take note of this. There is something quite wrong in the fact that life is better for a cow in the EU than for a farmer in a developing world country. That cannot be right. We must make a start on this task, therefore. We must also make a start on looking at the EU's global role. For what purposes do we mean to use our cooperation? Are we to let the USA determine everything in this world? Is it to be the USA that dictates the list of terrorist organisations, the policy on terrorism, anti-missile shield strategy, Iraq, etc.? Or will the EU find a counterweight to the dominance of the USA? What does the EU want when it comes to human rights? We have been aware of this in connection with enlargement: we have watched over the applicant countries, given them advice and guidance, made demands of them; but what then, and what about ourselves? What will happen about the rights of the Roma when enlargement has fallen into place? It will not get any easier, but it is something we must follow up. It is a matter of keeping a constant eye on our own situation. What, too, will the EU do at global level as regards oppressed peoples? What will we do as regards Chechnya? Will we allow Russia to call the tune there? What will we do as regards the Iranians and their fight against the mullah regime? Will we let our policy there be determined by feta cheese and oil, or will we really back our grand words up with action? There is much to tackle in the future; it will not get any easier, but we will get through it. (Applause) IN THE CHAIR: MRS LALUMIÈREVice-President

Political group: GUE-NGL