Mr President, the 2004 other institutions budget, as Mr Mulder has said, will be the first one for the European Union composed of 25 Member States. Consequently, it is likely to be more complex than any other and I would therefore like to thank everyone at the outset for their cooperation. For me it is imperative that the European institutions are provided with the necessary means to complete their preparations, because enlargement must be visibly successful to the European citizen. Within this context, there are three main themes in my resolution. Firstly, to achieve greater accountability through improved presentation and transparency of the budget. I want to improve the quality of the spending, not just achieve the spending. There is a need for further development of the information on most important cost factors, to achieve greater effectiveness and sound financial management. Real transparency will only really be evident externally to European citizens if we have it in the first instance internally. Our current system does not always lend itself readily to achieving this goal. Decision-making is too centralised and there is not enough devolution and delegation in management structures. Whilst we are on transparency, one of the major new areas under consideration is funding for political parties. I am very disappointed that those on the other side of this House, who claim to be champions of transparency, are pushing for funding within Parliament's budget instead of the Commission's. Surely this will leave us open to allegations that we are looking after our own political interest. This budget line should remain with the Commission, which has the mechanisms for managing it objectively. The Commission is wrong to take a very short-term view and propose otherwise. My second main concern is that we connect and communicate more coherently with the people of Europe. We need to be more innovative and ambitious in almost every area of our operation, never more so than in our information and communication policies. When it comes to informatics, our website has to be seen more as a communication tool than just an information port. Parliament has to play an even greater role in the interinstitutional communication strategy executed by the Commission. Furthermore, we need greater endeavours by everyone to ensure active citizenship and civic participation. It is therefore crucial that European citizens are better informed about the activities of Parliament and how European legislation can influence their daily lives. To achieve this we need to consider creating a European public media space. My third theme is to create a flexible framework for the future operations of Parliament and other institutions. This is probably one of the greatest challenges for all the institutions and I welcome the 'raising the game' proposals put forward by Parliament's Secretary-General to improve the focus of our secretariat's activities and give greater legislative assistance to Members. It has to be said, though, that this is a fairly tame set of proposals. Within these proposals there is one for establishing a tabling office, which is definitely a step in the right direction. I know there are those who have reservations about this, but if we are honest with ourselves the number of mind-bogglingly trivial amendments that we have to deal with is astonishing. I would have welcomed greater ambition and innovation from the Secretary-General, but I recognise the limited appetite our institution has for reform and change. In conclusion, I have been a rapporteur for only the last couple of months. However, I have discovered the process to be extremely instructive. I have found nooks and crannies in this House that I never knew existed. If I may beg your indulgence, I would like to share some of my initial impressions with you. I have come across some amazingly talented, committed and hard-working people, but for every one of them there are two who just appear to float. It is remarkable that this House achieves what it does and continues to evolve, given the resistance in almost every structure. The culture I have come across throughout the institution seems to be extremely hostile to even a small amount of change and no sooner has an opinion been expressed than there are letters flying around objecting to it. There are few who have truly appreciated the full implications of enlargement. There is a belief that we can carry on doing things as we have up to now, but just do them ten times more. The people of the new Member States have had to show extreme flexibility in moving from the old system to the new system. We in the institutions need to start showing similar flexibility if we are to enhance the credibility of our institutions.

Political group: PSE