Mr President, I would like to make an initial reference to the issue of the legal basis of this report and to the debate it has given rise to. I sincerely believe that it would not be the best approach to confront internal market interests and the interests of environmental protection or the health of the citizen's. What is more, it seems to me a serious mistake and I personally believe precisely the opposite. I believe we must adopt an integrated and complementary approach, I believe that when we talk about the environment, we must also take account of the interests of the internal market and the possible difficulties it may bring with it and I believe that, when we talk about the internal market, we must take account of environmental interests. That is sustainable development, that is integration of the environment, the economy and employment and that is what has been advocated in the proposal for issues to deal with at this year’s forthcoming Spring Council. I believe that, if we really do not believe in these three pillars of integrated and joint sustainable development, and to the same degree and with the same weight in all our considerations, we would be making political statements with a view to our summits and our communications as Community institutions which are entirely erroneous and false for our citizens. And I frankly do not believe in this. I believe in this integrated approach and I am, therefore, concerned much less about the legal basis of the reports than about the real focus of their content and about how cooperation is undertaken between the various Community committees and institutions. In this regard, and in relation to this report, I would like to say that during the Italian Presidency very considerable progress was made on this Regulation and also the creation of general guidelines on it was provided for. It was not approved because there was a significant problem in relation to POP waste and in particular the alternative methods for its destruction. I believe that this issue has been resolved in the new Annex IV(a), which is the outcome of negotiations during the Irish Presidency. In this regard I believe we should congratulate Mrs Frahm because she has done excellent work in terms of reaching a consensus, firstly amongst the parliamentary political groups and secondly also with the Council, so that we can approve this report at first reading. That is why, although I am not completely in agreement with her in terms of emphasising environmental aspects over everything else, and I believe we should achieve the balance which is what we in the European Union and the Member States are really advocating, I do believe that it is a good piece of work, I do believe that she has had difficulties reaching agreements on issues such as waste or the specific exemption of the manufacture of dicofol, a substance accepted under very specific restrictions, in an industrial process which is also very specific and which is carried out in a manner which is confined and absolutely isolated from the environment. I also agree with the revision clause, which states that the Commission will review the very specific situation of dicofol at the end of 2008 and I believe that what is being done with it is to apply, once again, in a reasonable manner, the precautionary principle, making industrial activity truly compatible with the maximum protection of the environment and safety for the citizens. With regard to Annex II, which lists substances which can be used subject to restrictions, I believe it has been right to maintain the structure of this Annex – I know that the rapporteur was not in favour of this – but I believe that, although at the moment it does not list any specific substance, it does leave the door open to future substances which may emerge and which both the Commission and Parliament, through its approval, believe should be used, produced or marketed under certain restrictions. With regard to the issue of lindane, I believe that it is very good that it has moved to Annex I as a prohibited substance and that its use may be permitted under certain also very strict conditions, as proposed in the agreement. Finally, I believe we should stress what I mentioned earlier: compatibility is important and we must never lose the reference of sustainable development with its three aspects: economy, environment and employment. With that reference I believe that Europe and the Member States can go far.

Political group: PPE-DE