Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, tomorrow we have to vote on a supplementary and amending budget which, without doubt, is, and will remain, unique in the history of this Parliament, for we are negotiating a figure which amounts to 0.005% of the European Union budget and have even arranged a debate specifically for this purpose. We asked Commissioner Schreyer to appear before this House to discuss the reports and the action we are taking. There is good reason to discuss these matters, for they concern the financing of the Convention. This House pushed harder than any other European institution for the setting up of the Convention; we promoted and demanded it. We demanded it because we believe it is necessary to develop and introduce new procedures in Europe in order to improve interinstitutional relations and the interdependence between the three institutions. This means that there must be mutual respect, an awareness of roles, and transparency. The Spanish Presidency's initial proposal on the management of the funds necessary for the financing of the Convention alarmed us all, for it stipulated that the Council alone would provide the money, administer it and – above all –monitor how it is spent. It made no reference at all to Parliament! Of course, under no circumstances can this be a precedent for future relations between Parliament, the Council and the Commission. The Committee on Budgets and this House firmly rejected this model. In doing so, we had to adopt an accelerated procedure as there was no time to follow our usual procedure. Indeed, we had to involve coordinators to discuss the matter. We could not even make proper preparations within the Committee on Budgets. Nonetheless, we did so because we were keen to ensure that the Convention could be launched tomorrow. What this House has achieved is to ensure that in conformity with our powers, we are now part of the budgetary authority as regards the allocation of funds. We are one of the two elements of the budgetary authority whose task is to decide on the allocation of funds. Transfers of funds can only be carried out with our consent, which is also necessary for the granting of discharge. This gives rise to other issues and we have discussed these as well. In the Committee on Budgets, we believe that the solution identified is a good one. We have, however, gone one better, for our colleagues from the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the Committee on Budgetary Control have added an extra dimension, which is all to the good. We will certainly ensure that the procedure adopted for the Convention, and the implementation of this procedure, do not become a blueprint for any other institutions which may be set up at European level at any time in the future. One existing institution – namely Coreper – will assume a function which has not been assigned to it at all at European level. It will be the body to which Parliament, the Council and the Commission grant the right to consent to discharge. It is astonishing: the Council will grant consent for the discharge of Coreper – one of its own institutions! This is very bizarre. This will not be a blueprint for any future arrangements in the European Union, and the discharge procedure will not be carried out on this basis in any other context. We will vigorously resist any moves in this direction. Parliament will defend its rights, and we will monitor developments very closely. However, we will vote in favour of the report tomorrow because we recognise that the Convention must be able to start its work. It is important to send out a positive signal to Europe by demonstrating that we are no longer applying the old procedures but are adopting a new approach, a new direction, and are shaping the future of Europe!

Political group: PSE