Mr President, Mr Titley has lived up to his reputation and has produced an excellent report on the Code of Conduct concerning arms exports, on which we would like to congratulate him. Needless to say, the report receives the full backing of the Group of the . That is why I should not so much like to confine myself to the technicalities of the report, but rather to a number of general observations. On 11 September, the first reports rolled in about the horrific attacks in the United States during the vote of the Titley report in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy. The European Union has reacted adequately and coherently. All available means are being deployed right across the pillars. One would wish for the same promptness of action in other areas too. The EU can do anything if it puts its mind to it. Where the arms export is concerned, we have to make do with a Code of Conduct which is considerably restricted by Article 296 of the EC Treaty which protects national security interests. That is such a vague concept that Member States, if they so wish, can more or less do their own thing. In fact, it has never been clear to me in what way national security interests can be different from those of the European Union. The arms export agreements are also typified by a large degree of voluntariness, but also, for example, by inconsistent agreements on the end use of exported arms. That is why an EU-wide and effective approach is lacking. Not all relevant information is made available, which obstructs the transparency of the policy. Annual reports are useful, but joint action is preferable, of course. Mr Titley’s report mentions a few areas which require attention, such as the destabilising distribution of hand-held weapons. That causes great chaos in some parts of the world. The trade in these weapons also sustains phenomena such as child soldiers. My group would like to turn this into a priority, also in cooperation with the candidate countries, the countries of the Stability Pact and countries such as Ukraine and Russia, for we know that many of the hand-held weapons which are in circulation in the world originate from those countries. The EU must make every effort, together with those countries, to tackle the often criminal trade in weapons. Here too we require a new international coalition. In the light of 11 September, it is important to tighten the agreements on the export of so-called dual-use goods. I am curious about the discussions which are undoubtedly already taking place behind the scenes. The citizens would like to know how the export policy will be adopted to prevent the wrong expertise from falling into the wrong hands. I would quote the reports on terrorism and the use of weapons of mass destruction in this connection. Here too, better cooperation with Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States is necessary. What will happen to the export of encryption software? Will new arrangements be made in this connection? The least we can ask from the Council and the Commission is to indicate the role which can improve the organised arms export policy in the fight against terrorism. As far as I am concerned, the debate on Article 296 can be re-opened. Arms export must form an integral part of the new EU security policy. Only then will it be truly effective.

Political group: PSE