Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the dogmatism and apathy dominating the economic policy of the European Union are causing great concern. Unemployment is rising once again, there is a threat of recession and the conditions for lasting growth are not in place. However, so far, the Council, the Commission and the European Central Bank have come up with platitudes and have convinced themselves that everything is fine. The euro does provide protection against currency speculation but it offers no protection whatsoever from financial crises. We are involved in financial globalisation up to our necks. The main cause of the current apathy is the fundamentalist approach of those opposed to state intervention. Those who subscribe to this view try desperately to promote fiscal competition, as Pierre Jonckheer reminded us. They reduce public spending but welcome turgidity on the stock exchange and its requirements to produce financial returns. This results in a lack of public and private investment. Another reason for this apathy is that visions for Europe are somewhat lacking. I think it is time we recognise this. You advocate strengthening coordination between national policies. I am in favour of this, but we must recognise that basically this has come to be equated with the Growth and Stability Pact. I am sure you will confirm this. The debate must not remain polarised between the ‘fundamentalists’ and those who want to make the Growth and Stability Pact more flexible. We advocate an action plan to get us out of this rut. Firstly, as elected representatives at a European and national level, we must come to a consensus and call for a revival of the European economies. We must send a message along these lines to a meeting of the European Council in Ghent and to the Commission. In order to achieve economic revival, we must favour public spending and credit as opposed to tax cuts. Funds to promote investment should also be established. Secondly, we believe that we must carry out an in-depth revision of the Growth and Stability Pact. This Pact has remained unchanged since 1992, although the global situation is now very different and the euro has appeared. I appreciate the idea of starting to make it more flexible, as mentioned by Mrs Neyts. However, we want something more than this. We want reform. Two principles should guide us in this. Public or mixed economy choices should balance market forces. Must I point out that President Bush used Keynesian policies to revive the American economy, after President Clinton refused to cut taxes to increase his popularity? Furthermore, the criteria of state intervention should allow for decision-making at national level and for solidarity. Restricting public deficit to a maximum of 3% in no way succeeded in preventing the exacerbation of differences. Consequently, the new Growth and Stability Pact would be based on common criteria for effectiveness, relating both to taxation and public spending. Taxation should combat the volatility of the financial markets and government stocks by taxing financial products and revenues. Spending should create the necessary conditions for lasting growth, employment, security and solidarity. We also want the Pact to include taxation and budgetary tools appropriate to the European Union. Fortunately, the Belgian Presidency has suggested this. Thirdly, the Laeken declaration must include a commitment to establishing Community powers in relation to macro-economic policy.

Political group: GUE-NGL