Madam President, today, we are once again discussing the imminent fulfilment of a very deeply cherished wish. Many realise this. Others prefer to speculate about uncertainty, fear and alleged dissatisfaction. More than ever, it is the politicians’ responsibility not to pander to that populism. It is our task, and that of the media, to offer the people a true picture of reality, whether this is beneficial or not. Parliament and the Commission largely agree on the policy to be adopted. I would thank Commissioner Verheugen for his very committed speech. He has always approached this matter with due thoroughness, with a critical eye and with a great sense of responsibility for the European Union and for the candidate countries. This is how we as Parliament would have wanted it, and this is how it has been all these years. The evaluation of progress and of shortcomings in the candidate countries has always been clear and detailed. In the interest of the enlargement process, we have always said to our friends in the candidate countries that we want to see what their suffering is rooted in. We can use this knowledge in order to aim our policy effectively. We would like to point out that a great deal is yet to be done in the area of public freedoms. This is only natural, on account of the rule of law being prioritised with good reason. A great deal of money has been, and still is being, pumped into improving the capacity of governments to enforce and apply their adapted legislation. In the recent Commission communication on administrative and judicial capacity, it is noted that a great deal of work still needs to be done. I would like to ask the Commissioner what the odds are of a timely completion of a necessary improvement and further development of the rule of law in the candidate countries, so that these can function effectively after 18 months to two years. The Commissioner, particularly the Commissioner for Justice and Home Affairs, has an important role to play in the field of monitoring and guaranteeing the smooth running of things, also in future. In this area, a yellow card will probably be issued more frequently in future than we were used to in the past. In my view, the idea of perpetuating back-door politics by appointing a high official for this policy in the Council is highly astonishing. I experience this as a slap in the face of the Commission and Parliament. What kind of example is this supposed to set for the candidate countries? Apparently, it is one of the Council’s fondest wishes to avoid parliamentary control, certainly in the form of the capacity to remove a political official from office. Finally, the idea of a referendum is frequently being mooted in a few countries. A referendum would possibly have been appropriate at the outset of the whole process, but then the surveys were so positive that nobody was ever in any doubt about the fact that the European citizen really wanted this enlargement, by way of paying off a debt of honour to Central Europe. A survey now would be very odd indeed, because that would give the impression that after this enormous amount of work – which, very often, was also very unpopular work – after compliance with all the requirements, it would be possible yet again to be faced with a ‘no’ from the Member States, based on a referendum which would be very difficult to interpret. This is why I think that we as politicians must find our way to the people, as we have always done, with the sense of criticism that we have always had.

Political group: PPE-DE