Mr President, by my reckoning Mr Heaton-Harris's speech contained an error rate of about 50% and I hope he manages to bring it down in time for next year's debate on the discharge. (NL) – Mr President, I endorse the proposal to grant discharge to the Commission for three reasons. Firstly, things have improved. Both the Court of Auditors and Parliament have been able to establish that. The first results of the Commission reforms are now visible, especially in the field of financial management and control. Secondly, the Commission has carried out some sterling work. There has been effective consultation between the different rapporteurs and the Commission. The Commission has taken us seriously. As far as I am concerned, there is a break in the trend compared to the previous Commission, which did not take the discharge process and this Parliament sufficiently seriously. Thirdly, I think that we should deploy the discharge tool, which this Parliament has at its disposal, selectively. Instead of wielding the axe, as is sometimes referred to in this Parliament, we should use Mr Blak’s surgical filleting knife, which will yield us more results. I would, however, like to draw your attention to a number of aspects. Firstly, financial supervision will soon be divorced from internal audit within the European Commission. This Parliament will be voting on this on Thursday. It is one of the most important recommendations which the Committee of Wise Men have made. It is also the first reform which is being enshrined in legislation. This reform does not only apply to the European Commission, but also to the Council and Parliament. I notice that the Secretary-General is present today, and I would call on him too to implement this reform in Parliament itself at the earliest opportunity. The other institutions should take a long and hard look at this too. Secondly, we need to further refine and further politicise the discharge instrument. The DAS, the Statement of Assurance, must be improved. We need to focus more on the different sectors so as to be able to draw a distinction between the different areas of policy. We must single out Member States if they make mistakes – we will hopefully do this also by means of an amendment to Mr Blak’s report – and we should not only look at figures, but also at the quality of policy. Mrs Van der Laan is right to make the first move in this connection in her report on other institutions, which I, by the way, congratulate on their policy. We will postpone the discharge for the Economic and Social Committee, but I have a feeling that this will be granted soon. Thirdly, officials who make mistakes within the Commission and within the other institutions must be disciplined if these mistakes involve financial problems. We call for a committee on financial irregularities to be set up which can deal with this kind of matter and can make referrals to the disciplinary procedure. Finally – and I would echo the opinion which Mrs Van der Laan expressed this morning in the debate – it is necessary for us to call the Council to account now. The budget of the Council is taking on ever increasing proportions. In areas such as justice, home affairs and foreign affairs, the Council has more or less exclusive rights. It is no longer acceptable that in this discharge procedure, in which we not only verify the figures but also the quality of policy, the Council’s increasing budget is still not subject to proper democratic control.

Political group: PSE