Mr President, with Mário Soares’s particular knowledge of Macau and the close attention that he has paid to developments in the Special Administrative Region that has been created there, he has provided this House with an extremely important and timely document. His report starts with an analysis of the institutional and legislative framework that has been designed for the region and of the potential of the modern democratic structures that these have lead to. The report takes account, of course, of the particular culture and the specific historical, social and economic bonds that underpin Macau’s relationship with Portugal and the European Union on the one hand, and with the People’s Republic of China, on the other. In this way, the report outlines the expectation which the clearly positive changes in the Special Administrative Region have confirmed, even though we know that we cannot yet take account of as many tangible figures as we would like, in order to have a true picture of these first twelve months – in fact a very short time. If, as we hope, and as the Soares report has already indicated, these positive aspects are fully confirmed, we must see this as the result not only of the careful preparation for the transfer of sovereignty on the part of Portugal and China, but also of the special commitment demonstrated by Macau’s current authorities. These positive aspects are also, and it is important to remember this, the result of the truly outstanding action of the last Portuguese Governor of Macau, Vasco Rocha Vieira, on whose merits Parliament had the opportunity to hear the specially authorised statement by Commissioner Patten, in the December 1999 plenary. The benefit of this action on the ground was to guarantee lasting respect for fundamental rights, amongst other things, and this was a serene and heartfelt fight without the histrionics that characterised the fight for which the Sakharov prize-winners were rewarded, and yet it was carried out with similar efficiency and with equally far-reaching effects. The very positive aspects that I have just mentioned must not, however, lead the European Union’s authorities to pay less close attention to later developments. My justification for saying this consists of a few points, which are perhaps explained by the differences in outlooks. We know that, in the meantime, changes have been made to the company code that are likely to clash with the rules on transparency in the field of invitations to tender. We also know that the Portuguese language is being used less, both at an official level and in schools and social situations. There even appear to be signs of changes to electoral law and to certain aspects of public administration and the classification of civil servants, the health system and higher education. It is to be hoped that these are superficial aspects that do not herald a moving away from the European Union and a diminishing of Macau’s autonomy for the sake of practices employed in other countries in the region or for the sake of a watered-down situation that is less acceptable to China itself. Nevertheless, the Soares report reiterates the need for the statute and the legal framework adopted for Macau to be fully respected, both with regard to fundamental rights and to the other rights and principles of democratic law that stem from the Joint Sino-Chinese Declaration of 1987 and the Basic Law of 1993, the thrust of which it would be useful to summarise. This law insists on the need to stimulate cooperation between Europe and Macau in all areas, because the importance of rapidly appointing a representative of the European Union to that Special Administrative Region is clear. For these reasons, congratulating Mr Soares once again, I wish, in conclusion, to express my support and my praise for his report.

Political group: PPE-DE