Mr President, 11 September showed us that the world we live in is very insecure. We discovered that the world's security, stability and economy are much more fragile than we previously believed. Wherever we look – whether at the fight against terrorism, the horrors of the Balkans, the nightmare of a small town in Switzerland, the virtual anarchy in parts of Africa – one common theme emerges everywhere: the huge number of weapons which are freely available. That is one of the main causes of instability in the world, and we must act before the tidal wave of weaponry overwhelms us all. The Code of Conduct on Arms Exports was a significant development in controlling this trade. It is clear from the second annual report that there is rapidly growing cooperation between Member States, both in terms of implementing the code and of achieving greater mutual understanding of the interpretation of the code. It is also clear that arms export policy in relation to security is becoming more closely aligned. There is much greater transparency in arms controls policies. Most EU States, except for Austria, Greece and Luxembourg, now produce their own annual reports, albeit with a huge variance in the quality of information provided. It is worth noting that the NGOs' Safer World holds up the UK's annual report, first introduced by the then Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, as an example for other countries. The code's influence goes beyond the EU: all the accession countries, the EEA, EFTA States, Canada and Turkey now subscribe to the code's principles. Member States are also seeking to apply those principles in wider international fora. It would be a mistake to underestimate the importance of what has been achieved or the considerable mindshift that is taking place among Member States in this field. Nonetheless, there are areas where the code needs to be strengthened. The principles of the code will be constantly undermined if action is not taken to control and license arms brokers. It is beyond belief that in many countries you need a licence to own a shotgun but not to trade in weapons of any type. Some arms brokers are legitimate businesses; many, however, are little more than merchants of death. Action in this field must be an absolute priority. Similarly, controlling the activities of EU armaments companies will inevitably be compromised by the uncontrolled licensing of production outside the EU. We further need a more harmonised system of end-use data provision, certification and enforcement. Controls of official exports are important, but the illegal trade in arms is our biggest problem. I welcome the work of Member States towards a UN Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons, reminding Parliament that the definition includes things like shoulder-carried, anti-aircraft missiles. I very much regret the attitude of the USA to that conference and the influence of its gun lobby. We can only hope that recent events will cause the USA to reflect on the need for global partnerships to remove the causes of insecurity. We must have a global crackdown on this illegal trade. Greater transparency is the guardian of our security in this field. Despite the rapid advances made, I would like to see all countries producing publicly available annual export reports in a commonly agreed format. The Council's annual report ought to be more detailed, as I have set out in my report. We would naturally encourage greater scrutiny of arms policies by Member State parliaments. I was delighted that last year Member States agreed a Common List of Military Equipment to which the code applies. We now need a common list of non-military security and police equipment, and I am happy to accept the amendments on that subject. The list, however, has to be meaningful and provide the basis of effective action in this field and not be a statement of general intent. We will not win the war on terrorism – which we are all talking about at the moment – unless we control arms, the tools of this deadly trade. That is the challenge confronting us now and it is even more important today than it was this time last year when we debated the first annual report.

Political group: PSE