Mr President, I would like to begin by complimenting Mr Morillon on the fact that right at the start of his report he has indicated what the guiding principle of European foreign and security policy really ought to be. Even in his considerations he says – to my mind quite correctly – that the guiding principle should be crisis prevention. Only in emergencies, only in crisis situations must the European Union have military means at its disposal. That is precisely the order that my Group supports and that is also the reason why for example we support the action of the European Union in Macedonia and Bosnia. It shows that the European Union – finally I would say – has at its disposal almost the last in the entire spectrum of means when it comes to foreign and security policy. In addition to diplomacy, in addition to economic means, now military means too, but please in that order. There are two parts of the report that I want to discuss. Firstly, the General – rightly in my view – has used an amendment to propose making one point even more strongly than already appears in his report, that is that we need a strategic concept. What do we want exactly with European security policy? Where do we want to act? What precisely do we need for it? When do we want to do it? This seems very good to me. I am also very much in favour of revising the Petersberg tasks – that is the official description of our strategic concept, which in my mind is far too limited. Then I am in favour of doing that first and only then to start discussing what for example I feel is some empty talk in Mr Morillon’s report, that is territorial defence. Do we suddenly have to add this to the tasks of the European Union? Do we have to adopt Article 5 of the WEU Treaty? In my opinion, this decision is coming too soon. Let us deal with the strategic concept first, then let us look at what we want to do with these European means. As far as I am concerned, it is also too soon to be saying that we must be capable of taking on a kind of Kosovo-type task in 2009. Look at the strategic concept first and then take on specific tasks of that kind. Secondly, another good point from the report concerns the misunderstanding that often arises when we say – a little of which was apparent in Mr Patten’s and Mr Watson’s interventions – that there would be too little money to do what we ought to do. The problem is not, my fellow MEPs, that there is too little money. The problem is that we do not spend it enough and not efficiently enough and that in the past we have done too little by way of task specialisation. There’s the rub! Let us now be completely clear about this. I am glad that that is also stated very clearly in Mr Morillon’s report. If we are talking about money, then I am in favour – fortunately the rapporteur too – of gradually transferring the financial resources from in my view completely impenetrable ad hoc budgets between Member States that cannot be controlled at all democratically, to the European Union budget. There is much to be said for this, even if it is only that as a result the European Parliament also finally gains a grip on European security policy, because the money that is spent on it is in our budget. And then finally, Mr President, I come to my biggest fear. We can probably agree in this Parliament, with the Council too, about increasing effectiveness. We must be able to act faster and better. Agreed, my fellow MEPs, but then please on the basis of a clear strategic plan. But I am afraid that what certainly goes with it, that is democratic control, is lacking. We cannot go on increasing effectiveness, improving our capabilities, without clarity as to where the democratic control of this security policy is taking place. If we are in favour of it – and I think that the majority of the Parliament is in favour of deciding by majority, even on security policy – then it cannot be the case that the European Parliament is sidelined when it comes to democratic control. We need effectiveness, but please together with democratic control, and ultimately it will have to take place here in this house.

Political group: Verts-ALE