Mr President, I regret that the report has been accepted as an item on our agenda by the majority of the group presidents and the Conference of Presidents. As has been stated before, Europe has no competence in this area. It is also surprising because, last year, the Socialists and Liberals refused a debate on a topic which is just as ethical and sensitive, namely euthanasia, on the grounds that a debate on such a topic was reported not to fall within the European remit. This time, just before enlargement, an initiative report is being placed on the agenda with major implications for the candidate countries, but without their involvement. This is about them but without them. This will do little to instil faith in the democratic decision-making process in the future. Acceptance of the report jeopardises the enlargement process. Mrs Doyle has already stated this. Poland, the referendum in Ireland, and other instances spring to mind. I hope that everyone who votes tomorrow is acutely aware of this. I have received many negative reactions from various European countries, in eastern and western Europe alike, and even today from the European Forum of National Laity Committees in Erfurt. The topic is important and is tied in with a number of topical issues, such as the increase in sexually transmitted diseases, the large number of unwanted pregnancies, also among young people, the large number of legal and illegal abortions and any adverse effects on women afterwards, the importance of relationships and family, the importance of education in this area, etc. Unfortunately, this report – certainly the original version – largely disregarded these issues. Contrary to what is being said here, this report was mainly about the right to abortion and contraceptives, their availability – preferably for free – and information about them. The paragraphs bear this out. There is hardly anything about the aforementioned points, about possible prevention of unwanted pregnancies or, for example, the responsibility of men in this. I am pleased that at least these amendments, tabled by our group, have been adopted. The report should not have been put on the agenda because the topic does not form part of our competence. Moreover, I do not think this is a good report for a variety of reasons. Despite the few improvements, it is too one-sided and sometimes incorrect, in my view. It is incorrect where the report is too positive about the results of the far-reaching, liberal abortion laws and easy access to contraceptives. Research has shown that these are no guarantee for a low abortion rate. In addition, the report is inherently flawed. It believes abortion legislation to be a competence of the Member States, but wants abortion legalised in all countries. On behalf of those who referred to this as right-wing propaganda a moment ago, I should like to read out a section of Paragraph 12: “... recommends that abortion should be made legal, safe and accessible to all”. The report states that there is insufficient statistical data, but does draw conclusions and comparisons. Above all, it bears witness to an image of man which does not appeal to me. It has only been written from the perspective of rights, and not from the perspective of responsibilities. Our group has tabled compromise amendments which would trim the sharp edges. I gather that the Socialists and Liberals cannot accept many of these. They want their own opinion expressed by the Parliament, even if the topic does not fall within our remit, even if it jeopardises the accession process and even if it is patronising towards the accession countries. I have sympathy for many of the problems, but it is beyond me why this report should be on our agenda at this time. We have taken the wrong turning for a serious problem. It is a political move lacking in strategy.

Political group: PPE-DE