I agree totally with the sentiment of President Prodi that this is an historic opportunity and one that should not be lost. The Summit at Nice bears a responsibility for Europe and should in part fulfil a contract which we made at Helsinki last December and which we should deliver on. Two things were said at Helsinki to candidate states in Europe. Two locks were placed on the door of enlargement. One was that those candidate states themselves must adopt and implement the 'acquis communautaire'; that is their task shared with us. The second lock on the door is that we ourselves, as fifteen, needed to recognise the fundamental need to reform how we do business in order to continue to do business effectively, indeed to begin to do business even more effectively than at present. That is the unavoidable and minimum requirement of Nice and it is a major and central target. We in this Parliament will be required at the end of that process to give or not to give our assent. It is a major responsibility. I speak for a group which is totally committed to the earliest feasible enlargement of the European Union. I also say that we will listen with great care to what Mr Prodi and the Commission say by way of analysis of the Nice Treaty and to the candour which he promises. We ourselves will go through a very candid analysis. My appeal to you, Mr President-in-Office, is to present us in this Parliament a document worthy of this Parliament's assent and a document worthy of the scale of the historic challenge we face in Europe. That challenge is the reunification of our old continent; that challenge is an enlargement unparalleled in scale and that is what Nice must prepare us for. To do less than that is to fail Europe and this House, when it reviews Nice, cannot allow Europe to fail. I should like to say, with regard to a number of the specific points, that my group believes that, at this stage of evolution of the European Union, having one national for each Member State of the Commission still remains a sensible proposition and enhances the legitimacy of the Union. It should not become an issue which traduces the Union into a false contest between the interests of the large and the small, when the common European interest should be the central goal. My group, at this stage, would prefer a reweighting of votes, the double majority, but you have explained that other issues are under review. We support enhanced cooperation but insist that it must be open-ended and open to all and not exclusive and must be based and rooted in a way which respects the 'acquis communautaire'. We are deeply attached to the Charter of Fundamental Rights and we do not want simply to declaim the Charter. If we proclaim it as something with meaning, it must find roots, and we still commend to you to root it in Article 6. We commend to you to give the proclamation a meaning in substance, even if it is not yet fully and completely in such a case judiciable. We support the review of Article 7 because the Austrian lesson has taught the need of it. Nice is a test to see if our old continent is ready for a new, continental-scale enlargement. I believe that we can succeed but, Mr President-in-Office, we need your Presidency to mobilise the Council for Europe by animating the Nice Council to achieve something which is genuinely historic. There should not merely be constructive compromise, those were your words, there must be significant achievement. We will set the bar high and I hope together, Council, Commission and Parliament, we can clear that bar. I say this today, if the bar is compromised and is too low, we will refuse to consider it and we will do so for Europe and we will do it in good conscience.

Political group: ELDR