Mr President, ‘not perfect, but unhoped-for’: the words of Convention Chairman Valéry Giscard d'Estaing are entirely fitting. Despite some criticisms, which every Convention member could probably voice from their own standpoint, the result of the Convention's work is to be commended. What is significant, however, is that the Convention has presented the results of its work in a joint paper, which will be submitted to the summit without an alternative. The previous speakers, Mr Méndez de Vigo and Mr Hänsch, have underlined the major progress achieved through the Convention's work, and I endorse their comments. From my perspective, we can indeed describe it as a milestone in the history of European integration, and I would like to take this opportunity to thank both of them particularly for their work in the delegation and their work in the Convention's Praesidium. What is especially important, to my mind, is that democracy in Europe has been significantly enhanced, not only the rights of the European Parliament or the national parliaments, but above all, direct democracy and citizens' participation in the development of the European Union. The fact that we will have a citizens' initiative as a mechanism in future and that people can get directly involved in European politics is something I see as extremely important, especially in terms of developing a European public arena. I fully endorse this. I am in favour of holding a referendum on the Constitution in every Member State. I would like to point out to everyone that an initiative has been launched for this very purpose with more than 100 supporters in the Convention and I myself am a signatory to it. I hope that in Part III, it will be possible to make further progress with European integration, especially in the social field and services of general interest, where we can link in with the work on Part I. Let me follow on from Mr Hänsch's comment a moment ago. He said that the European Union is not a global power, but that it does have a global power's responsibility. I must say that I am very alarmed by what the EU Foreign Ministers have just agreed in Luxembourg: for the first time, the European Union is threatening the use of military force against countries which flout disarmament commitments and are involved in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Naturally, this is not targeted at the USA, which simply withdrew from the ABM Treaty in 2001! It is not all that long since US Secretary of State Colin Powell painted a graphic picture to the Security Council of the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. That was followed by the war, and as you all know, weapons of mass destruction have still not been found. I am frightened by the fact that the EU Foreign Ministers are now following the same line of argument as Powell and apparently want to endorse the Bush doctrine. Admittedly, the declaration does state, by way of restriction, that the UN Security Council will play what is described as a key role in measures threatened by the EU, but this does not allay my fears. The declaration conflicts not only with international law but also with the Convention's draft Constitution! Article 3 (4) commits the European Union to strict observance of international law and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter. We all know that threatening the use of military force to resolve conflicts is prohibited under international law. We cannot allow the Constitution to be undermined even before it enters into force! (Applause)

Political group: GUE-NGL