Madam President, Commissioner, Ombudsman, I am delighted, on behalf of the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party, to take advantage of this historic moment to thank Mr Söderman for his work in promoting values we hold dear. Like everyone else, I am thinking particularly of transparency and good administration. We note that, yesterday, the Ombudsman once again pointed out the misuse of data protection, that is to say of the personal data laws, to prevent the transparency we desire. I want MEPs to be aware of the fact that the Ombudsman is pointing in this case not only to the Commission but also to Parliament. We must turn the focus upon ourselves when we reflect upon how we work. I also see that Mrs Hautala, who is one of the rapporteurs in this area, is present in the Chamber. We are talking with forked tongues today in Parliament too. It is also interesting to see that, in the ongoing consultation procedure on data protection, at least four Member States have proposed significant changes. I hope that we in Parliament will support these changes when they reach us. When it comes to the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour, I have to admit that I do not properly understand Commissioner Liikanen’s approach, the consequence of which is that the Commission is now unable to do anything. Like many Member States, we noted that the discussion on good governance had opened up possibilities. In Parliament, we have spent a long time studying the legal base for the proposal tabled and are left in no doubt that there are legal possibilities there. Why waste time when it is a question of doing something that will benefit people? Even though there is now better cooperation, I personally am extremely disappointed at the Commission’s response to our initiative regarding the Ombudsman’s statute. The amendments we tabled were very modest and not at all extensive. I therefore hope that the Danish Presidency can instead achieve some success in this area. The Ombudsman needs to be able to carry out his work in full. On Monday, Mrs Corbey raised an issue in Parliament concerning the ways in which the Commission helps people to resolve issues and solve problems in connection with the application of Community law. It seems to me that the Commission is at a complete loss here. The Solvit system, which will shortly be presented in the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, has been introduced, while Eurojust, referred to by Mrs Corbey, is not being maintained. Citizens Direct is being launched, but without any real success. We have a lot to do in this area. It is very unclear how the Commission is to utilise resources. Finally, I should like Parliament itself to reflect upon how we deal with the complaints that come in. We shall prepare the legislation on the recognition of examinations later this autumn. It is an area in which we have received a great many proposals. It nonetheless seems as if many people prefer not to take account of these proposals but, rather, to stick to national legislation and not accept the signals coming from our citizens. What, in my view, is most gratifying about this debate is the fact that the Commission has declared itself willing to study the interinstitutional agreement and how we are to handle complaints, something which, as Mr Perry mentioned, the Danish Presidency is also prepared to do. There is a window of opportunity this autumn. We must use that window in order to improve the position of our citizens and not wait until the Commission takes the initiative. We should also study the Ombudsman’s draft Convention as it relates, for example, to recourse to the EC Court of Justice, for there are some problematic issues where the conflict has not been solved between the Commission, on the one hand, and the Ombudsman and Parliament, on the other. Finally, may I say a big thank-you to Mr Söderman, who speaks the same beautiful, and most easily understandable, form of Swedish as I do.

Political group: ELDR