Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, I do actually believe that the Foreign Ministers' meeting in Valencia was a success, and, step by step, it is also becoming clear what significance the Mediterranean region has for all of us – not only for those countries of the European Union for whom the Mediterranean forms a border, but also for those countries further away from it. The Mediterranean region is important, enlargement is important, and all these things are in our common interest. We can see that if there is no genuine and peaceful development in the Mediterranean region, it is to all our streets that the fire spreads. The attack carried out on Djerba, which was aimed at tourists, shows us how close the flames have already got to our front doors. It is important, for this reason, that this dialogue should be engaged in on the basis of equality of rights. The dialogue is also cultural and not capable of being brought about by politics alone. We attach great significance to the creation of economic, social and political prospects for people in North Africa, as these can bring the region stable development which will in future be democratic. That, indeed, is another reason why it is so important that the region should get speedy and effective help unhindered by bureaucracy. I am aware of Commissioner Patten's great exertions in recent years towards achieving improvements in this field, but now as much as then we are in a position in which money is spent and formal resolutions adopted, the effectiveness of which, however, leaves something to be desired. That implementation is inadequate is due both to difficulties on our side and to bureaucracy in the countries in question, and that must change. No success will be achieved across the Mediterranean region as a whole for as long as there is still no resolution to the Middle East conflict, which keeps bringing emotions to the boil and making the whole Mediterranean problem difficult to resolve. The shuttle diplomacy currently going on there sometimes strikes me as ridiculous. Mr Powell and Mr Solana keep travelling there – on alternate weeks. Mr President-in-Office of the Council, how about a Council resolution to the effect that the next delegation would be sent, not to Jerusalem, but to Washington, in order to enforce the sending of a joint delegation to Jerusalem and Ramallah, with the Russians and the United Nations joining in? I believe this would make a real difference. On this issue, what Commissioner Patten has said in this House about joint efforts is precisely what needs to be said loud and clear. I know that there are major diplomatic reservations on one side or the other, but I do think that we have to get the idea accepted that only a joint effort with those Arab states that are willing to try something can bring an end to the violence, giving the message that the end of the road has been reached. This is the only way to credibly guarantee security in the region, and it could also create the conditions for a measure such as a sort of Marshall Plan, for which we are prepared, to be effective. It is a vital prerequisite for further development that we get both states – Israeli and Palestinian – recognised by all their neighbours. In particular, we also need a solution to the refugee problem, so that people there can have new prospects and so that the refugee camps cease to be the epicentres of incessant new terrorism. That must be stopped. It is not acceptable to send them to Israel and by this means to bring about change within Israel; rather, the Arabs must be prepared to offer the Palestinian refugees a future in their countries. I believe that it is not just Le Pen's people, but also ourselves when we express differing viewpoints, who need to be reminded of the quotation from Voltaire: ‘Your opinion is quite the opposite of my own, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’ (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE