Presidents, ladies and gentlemen, summits come and go and one is very much like the next. The meetings of Heads of State or Government produce conclusions whose practical content is generally inversely proportional to their length. The conclusions of the European Council are increasingly reminiscent of the pompous resolutions of the now fortunately defunct Supreme Soviet. Three years ago, however, Europe did take a great leap forwards, in the shape of Lisbon, but the fine ambitions set there have evaporated, even though we still intone the mantra that Europe must become the most competitive knowledge-based society, blah blah blah. The fact is that the Union does not provide itself with resources that match its ambitions. How can we make our fellow citizens understand that we are in the process of building Europe with a Community budget that stands at around one measly per cent of gross domestic product? The federal budget of the United States redistributes more than 30% of its national GDP. Even the Swiss, who have the reputation of being relatively stingy, redistribute 15% of their GDP through the Confederal budget. The budgets of the Member States cannot make up for an inadequate Community budget. After three years of mild recession, almost all the States need to address the problem of dwindling resources. They are faced with either getting into further debt or having to reduce expenditure on investment, sometimes both at once. Public investments have fallen in the European Union to around one measly percentage point of GDP. The United States manage 3%. According to the Commission’s own staff, 1% of investment brings with it growth of 0.6%. The Union’s Member States will not get back on track to achieve healthy growth by now limiting their spending on investment and by cutting European citizens’ purchasing power. Mr Berlusconi has just referred to the need to stimulate growth and competitiveness in Europe. In this context, we have just rediscovered trans-European networks, but where is the money to fund them? Mr Berlusconi has spoken vaguely about cofinancing under the Community budget. Mr Prodi spoke about a lever effect, thanks to the Union budget paying for 30% of cross-border transport costs. The Commission document on the European growth initiative only refers, however, to redeploying existing appropriations and does not mention a single extra euro. Since it is impossible to spend the same appropriations twice, using appropriations from the structural funds or even those from the Sixth Framework Programme for Research and Development to finance the TENs will not bring any additional growth. This is a tragic waste. Europe is neglecting future spending, which means spending on education, research and infrastructure. The Brussels summit concluded with nothing more to show than pious wishes. We are now told that concrete decisions will be taken on 12 and 13 December. My group, Mr President, will judge the Italian Presidency on these concrete decisions. In order to assist the presidency, we suggest that it take a fresh look at the ideas of Jacques Delors. Why not fund the TENs through a major European loan? The European Union’s debt capacity remains intact. The euro zone has become an internal market in which nearly 90% of trade is conducted between partner countries. Why not be bold enough to launch a policy to stimulate growth that would not work in each country in isolation but which could achieve real results if implemented across Europe?

Political group: PSE