Mr President, the solemn calls for budgetary rigour and discipline entail devastating constraints when it comes to development aid. The promises remain, but there is a difficulty in getting actions to follow. That, in the end, is the thought inspired in me by this 2004 budget on development cooperation. I agree, on this matter, with our rapporteur, Mrs Sanders-Ten Holte, that any subordination to the external actions heading cannot but accentuate this phenomenon. Indeed, how is one to believe that the objective of eradicating poverty between now and 2015 will be achieved when – and this is only one example – the financial commitments to the Middle Eastern, Latin American, Asian and ACP countries that are the concern of the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee have not been honoured by the Commission, particularly when it comes to the health and education sectors? One is permitted to have doubts. The sums allocated still offer very little basis for fulfilling the declared wish of achieving the millennium objectives. How can approval not be given to any demand made of the Commission to give attention also to the rights of the most vulnerable people and to provide for a specific budgetary line when necessary? I am thinking, for example, of the rights of children. Any reduction in, or financial pressure upon, the fundamental elements of Community policy, such as human rights or the duty to give assistance to those who are weakest, would have the effect of sending out a very negative signal indeed to peoples already largely excluded from the march of world progress – victims, no more nor less, of a globalisation that has more in common with the law of the jungle than with growth and the equitable distribution of wealth. Developing countries are waiting for the European Union’s ambitions to change, a fact witnessed to, I think, by the reactions at the last WTO conference in Cancún. As a final word on the subject of development aid, I remain convinced that, without a serious review of the financial perspectives, the pressure upon this heading will become unbearable. As for the proposals concerning reconstruction in Iraq, they also call, at any rate in the long term, for an increase in overall resources to avoid the need to draw on the reduced sums for development aid. That being said, I agree with Mr Poos: the announcement of such a financial commitment cannot in any case precede Europe’s indispensable adoption of an independent policy in favour of the sovereignty of the Iraqi people and of the role of the UN. Regarding the amendments, I approve of those that could favour an annual evaluation of the results and anticipate a joint dialogue between the Commission, Parliament and the Council on the methods to be put in place in order to achieve the objectives. In the same spirit and in the interests of genuinely democratic and effective development cooperation, I am in favour of encouraging the widest participation, at all levels, of all those active in civil society. Finally, I am going to support my group’s proposal aimed at creating a specific line of aid for the rehabilitation and reconstruction of the territories under the administration of the Palestinian Authority. The Israeli army’s destruction, to the tune of almost EUR 40 million, of the infrastructure funded by the EU or the Member States was the product of criminal fury. The Palestinian population’s conditions of life have deteriorated considerably during the most recent period. We know that the Commission’s delegation on the ground is doing a remarkable job in difficult conditions. If, however, the EU is to be an active member of the quartet in the manner suggested by the speeches, the EU would do well to accord its budgetary lines as it intends.

Political group: GUE-NGL