Three rapporteurs and many draftsmen of opinions. Mr President, on behalf of the Green Group I would like to say how obliged I am to them for their endeavours, which have resulted in the piles of reports that I have here before me. Unfortunately I am only in a position to single out a few points and I intend to start with expenditure in the field of external action, since it is this area that is at the heart of this discussion on the budget. I share the rapporteur’s disapproval of the European Commission’s proposal to organise development cooperation under geographical headings from now on and to reduce thematic budget headings. It is by using the horizontal approach that we are in fact able to boost precisely those activities relating to subjects which we make our political priority: human rights, the environment and emancipation for example. Four years after reproductive rights were fought for at the United Nations conference in Beijing, the European budget heading on this is being torpedoed. I am very pleased that the rapporteur still put this right in his report. What is a pity is that this subject is going to be added to the budget heading on AIDS. Condoms seem to me to be a common denominator but there are also other aspects to the right of women to self-determination over their bodies. I fully support what the rapporteur has to say on financing the reconstruction of Kosovo. Minister Siimes reminded us of our obligations to the taxpayer and that the money must be spent wisely. I think that is precisely our point. The Kosovo pot is being filled at present by means of an across-the-board cut of 10% in expenditure on external action. This drip-feed method is, in every respect, a short-sighted approach of the kind used in accountancy and does not testify to a serious weighing up of priorities. The question that needs to be asked most is whether or not this amendment to an EU external policy area will also have its advantages in the long term. Mr Walter has already mentioned a number of examples. There will be less money for the peace process in the Middle East; less money for projects aimed at reintegrating demobilised soldiers into society. The lesson Kosovo has to teach us is not being taken to heart. There is less money being invested in conflict prevention. My group therefore believes that the reconstruction of Kosovo should be financed by raising the ceiling on Category 4. The financial assistance for East Timor and Turkey will, however, be more limited in scope. I agree with Mr Mulder that there is a case here for looking at the possibility as to whether the money can be found in the existing budget. This will certainly mean setting priorities, and that being the case, using the European budget to subsidise large enterprises’ exports will not be one of my first priorities. It may also be possible to create some room for manoeuvre – and that is perhaps something for discussion with the Council – by taking the EUR 89 million destined for humanitarian activities in Kosovo out of the humanitarian aid pot and carry it over to the total financial package for the region. These differences must not, however, be allowed to conceal – and I said earlier that I share the rapporteur’s opinion – the fact that more money must be made available for external policy because it is unacceptable to allow Kosovo to suffer on account of the developing countries. Another major point of discussion in the Committee on Budgets was the subsidising of non-governmental organisations. Budget heading 3021 – Mr Perry has already made reference to this too – contains a list of organisations awarded a precise amount. I do not intend to call the work of these organisations into question here, but I do feel that it is appalling that Parliament is going to have to be drafted in where the granting of individual subsidies is concerned. It is understandable though, from the point of view of the organisations concerned, for the Commission is failing badly in its tasks if organisations have to wait a year and a half for subsidies to be awarded or if criteria are changed in the meantime. The amount of red tape involved has to be seen to be believed. That is precisely what puts a brake on initiatives from EU citizens. The reform of the Commission is therefore also going to have to play its part in improving service provision by ensuring that money is spent efficiently, in a transparent manner, and also in accordance with the political choices of the budgetary authorities. That is not to say that the choices made by the budgetary authority itself are always rational. The cultivation and export of tobacco is being subsidised to the value of almost EUR 1 billion for example. In addition, we spend several millions a year on informing people about the negative consequences of smoking tobacco. How can we still justify this? Accordingly, my group proposes that we should reduce this tobacco subsidy by 10%. My final point, Mr President, relates to the Members’ voluntary pension scheme. This became the talk of the town because the affiliated Members were receiving extra pensions from European resources through this arrangement. This will all be gone into at length during the negotiations on the Statute and I will not attempt to prejudge any decision on this at this early stage. What I do want us to achieve in the course of these negotiations is to see the pension fund become independent of Parliament, both in terms of its administrative and political structure.

Political group: Verts-ALE