Mr President, tomorrow’s vote means that finally, the Commission presided over by Professor Prodi can get down to work. After listening to the speeches that the President-designate has made to Parliament, after voting for his appointment in May, and after taking part in the hearings with the 19 Commissioners-designate with a professional and open-minded approach, our group believes that the long crisis involving the Commission must end with a clear and strong appointment: you, Mr President, and your proposed Commission, in accordance with the powers that the Treaty confers on you. We have no hesitation in endorsing you so that the Union can once more have a strong executive, where there are new people, new programme perspectives and a new way of handling important internal and international policies which call for efficient, transparent and democratic institutions that respect each other’s autonomy yet co-operate effectively. I hope that this framework will bring about a return to the strategic partnership between Parliament and the Commission, albeit respecting their different functions. I say this because, as well as the political balances within the various institutions, the Council’s role is to represent the national governments, and the federal and Community leaning of the Commission and Parliament means that they are the driving force behind integration. This is the subject which recent events threatened to overshadow and that we must now discuss. It goes without saying that we must fight abuse of power, dishonesty and inefficiency in this area. The second report of the Committee of Independent Experts highlights the areas we need to deal with, many of which were already among Parliament’s suggestions and which you yourself have already given clear undertakings on. For example, the new criteria for the establishment of private offices and more transparency in relations with the European Parliament and public opinion. I would, however, like to mention that I am particularly concerned about something in the report, although I do not intend to dwell on it longer than necessary. Nonetheless, it is almost as dangerous as corruption. I refer to pursuing national interests to the detriment of common interests, and that goes for the Commission, and also Parliament, although in a different way. In fact, if Parliament becomes the forum where national political conflicts are replayed, how can we credibly rebuild an open, objective, robust and sometimes severe relationship with the Commission? How can we restore credibility to European politics? We are faced with economic and social challenges in the wake of the single currency and must carry out a far-reaching reform of the institutions. We need to specify the rights of European citizens. Looking beyond our borders, we must tackle the strategic vacuum that has been around for at least ten years and that has been exposed by the dramatic Balkans crisis. We must continue with a policy on the Mediterranean which is supported by the revitalised peace process. Then there is the dramatic crisis in Russia, and matters concerning human rights and the rights of the world’s minorities. In conclusion, if the European citizens do not receive convincing replies at a supranational level, it will be difficult to curb their feelings of detachment and alienation from the institutions, which will seem distant, incomprehensible and also costly. This is why, Mr Prodi, I wish you and your Commission every success in your work.

Political group: PSE