My group welcomes this new procedure. It is rather an imaginative way of reshaping our political debate on the priorities for the budget for 2003. My particular role in introducing it today is to look at our strategy as a group, one which we have accumulated over the past couple of years. On this basis we have six particular points which we have put down as amendments which I wish to review briefly. The first refers to how we handle outstanding budget commitments, which now amount to something around EUR 110 billion. In a joint declaration which we signed with the Council on 14 December 2000 we wanted to see these commitments reduced to normal levels by, if I remember correctly, December 2003. Therefore, the first of our amendments aims at getting clarification from the Commission as to exactly what its intentions are in trying to fulfil this commitment, how it is going to be done and how quickly it will be achieved. Secondly, in terms of Commission reform, which was also included in this joint declaration back in December 2000, we wanted to have a range of knowledge about how to achieve the reform. Some of us are in doubt about how far this reform has gone, how the rest of it is going to be achieved and when it will be implemented. That is the reason we have put the five hundred posts in reserve, which we wish to see released in stages as and when we receive information about the completion and the effectiveness of the reform. Thirdly, in relation to this there is the specific case concerning the Chief Accountant, where we have put a small amount of Commission travel expenses in reserve. We want to get to the bottom of the situation. We are seeking information and not the resignation of the Commission as some have rumoured. Therefore, we want Mrs Andreasen to come and tell us exactly what her allegations are. We also want to know exactly what the Commission's response to those allegations is. Fourthly, we wish to deal with the Council in terms of foreign policy and security. This is because we have had amounts put in the budget for 2003, but before approving them we want to enhance the position of the other institutions – Parliament as well as the Commission – in knowing how policies will be implemented. We have an instinct that we do not like to see the Council spending large sums of money in managing foreign policy without proper accountability. Fifthly, we have consistently said as a Parliament that we do not want to see expenditure on Afghanistan made to the detriment of other spending priorities in category 4. We are therefore suggesting that the flexibility instrument could be used for this purpose as well as perhaps dealing with that commitment made in the 2002 budget to deal with the EUR 27 million on fleet restructuring. Lastly, we have taken a slight departure from the norm and are recommending that the 220 Council posts are not approved until we have received a satisfactory explanation on a number of points which are listed in our amendment. These include the implementation of the early retirement scheme. We also need explanation, more particularly, on foreign policy so that we know what the projections are and how the Council thinks expenditure might be implemented over the next five years. I conclude by saying that this has nothing to do with revolution or our leader, who says that these are undercover censure motions. This is about accountability and the proper functioning of democracy, where we as a Parliament are taking our responsibility in the budgetary process, using the reserve on a judicious basis to get the information that we need to be able to carry out our job effectively.

Political group: PPE-DE