Mr President, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to extend my warmest thanks to both of the rapporteurs, and the Commission too, of course, for all their work. I share the disappointment of my fellow Member Mr Elles with regard to the absence of the Council. Today we are discussing the budget guidelines and the Commission policy strategy at the same time, as we hoped that a kind of synergy would arise between the two. That is very difficult, however, when those policy intentions are tabled so late: too late to discuss them at length in the groups and also too late to compare them with the guidelines drawn up by the European Parliament. Therefore, my group believes that it is important to choose another moment this year for the Commission to clearly set out its specific priorities for the coming year; not a laundry list of good intentions, therefore, but political choices combined with a time schedule. Indeed, we have little time left in this legislative period. I take as an example the agreements concerning chemicals. These are supposed to be implemented in 2004, but there is a danger that a number of changes which have been agreed upon will be presented too late, which may mean that the procedure for these additional changes cannot be finalised before the end of this term. In that case, of course, there is no way we can make that 2004 implementation date, and my group is concerned about this. In a different context, too, the motto of my group in recent months has always been ‘make law not war’. In our view, legal instruments and abiding by agreements are essential; especially in matters of human rights and democracy. We should like, therefore, to make further agreements on the clauses included in the treaties with third countries. Parliament must play a role in monitoring those agreements, and conclusions must also be drawn. How else is it possible to prevent those important clauses – to which the European Union also makes constant reference in order to indicate its support for human rights and democracy – becoming just empty words? The equal treatment of men and women also touches the heart of the Union’s values. Last Saturday was 8 March – International Women's Day – and so I thought it fitting to say something about that here, too. The directives have been very influential in the emancipation of women and it is vital that they are complied with, including in the candidate countries. This is a part of the acquis communautaire that has to be adopted without transitional periods. I expect the Commission to indicate whether, in its opinion, it has sufficient financial and administrative means for this. If not, this is another part that must be included in the budgetary procedure. I should now like to turn to a point of an entirely different order. The report by Mrs Gill states – against her wishes, incidentally – that political parties have to be paid out of Parliament’s budget. This really leaves me dumbfounded. Have we not learnt anything from the report by the Court of Auditors, which said that there must be no interconnection between the groups and the political parties? In addition, this would make the line between donating money and buying votes a very fine one. Could it be that the Group of the European People’s Party finds it convenient that the Council has no control over these funds, because in that case the Council, in accordance with the gentlemen’s agreement, will also not have any say as regards the funds for the political parties? In the view of my group, that is unacceptable. If, against our hopes, the amendment by the Group of the and the Group of the , advocating the inclusion of those funds in the general Commission budget, is not adopted, we shall unfortunately feel compelled to vote against the report.

Political group: Verts-ALE