Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the report of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy on the EU approach to the WTO Millennium Round is in line with the work of the previous Committee on External Economic Relations which adopted its position on each of the negotiating rounds in Marrakech, Singapore and Geneva with a large majority. The constant dialogue with the previous Commissioner, Sir Léon Britain, in 1998 and at the beginning of 1999 also contributed to many of the ideas of the European Parliament being incorporated in the Commission’s communication of 14.7.1999 and to these ideas being fully taken up in terms of content. The main concern in all this was always free and fair world trade in the interest of the European economy and those employed in it. We are therefore keeping to the tradition of our earlier work. At this point I would like to thank the current Commissioner, Mr Lamy, for his outstanding cooperation with the European Parliament during the last two months. Since the new Commission began its work, we have been engaged in intensive and, I consider, thus far highly successful dialogue. Today is about clarifying the comprehensive global negotiating approach from the perspective of the European Union, weighing it up and placing it in the political context of an overall strategy. The entire Millennium Round should be accompanied by recommendations of a specific nature which, formulated in accordance with Rule 97 paragraph 5 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, give us the opportunity to influence the work of the Millennium Round before the new Agreement is concluded, to play our part and to bring our weight to bear accordingly. A first series of recommendations could be made at the beginning of the year 2000 and we could return in detail to many of the proposals made recently in the Committee on External Economic Relations. The Council and the Commission should vigorously defend the full negotiating approach of the European Union in Seattle. In our report, we also demand that the Commission be successful in this matter and return with the right results. Our negotiating approach must mirror our importance as the largest trading region in the world and, at the same time, meet our responsibility for worldwide economic balance of interests, above all vis-à-vis developing countries. What should our focal points be in all this? What is really important? Should the expansion of the world trade system and the opening up of markets be the main focus or should the defence of our European economic and social model, of the social and ecological market economy and of the Community policies developed in the interest of citizens and consumers take a prominent position? In my opinion we should do both, even if there is a certain tension between the two. Both objectives are of equal importance to the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, as was shown in Monday evening’s vote. We are now approaching a further opening up of the worldwide market. Tariffs must be further reduced and technical trade barriers should disappear. Our markets also should be further opened up to developing countries, in particular those which are least developed, and to the ACP countries. The understanding of citizens must be promoted and increased through greater transparency of the WTO rules and its crucially important dispute settlement system. On the other hand, the obligations of the European Union under other international agreements, for example the World Health Organisation or the international labour organisations, must also be made clear and be taken into account in the WTO negotiations. However, we are moving towards the inefficiency which results from overloading the WTO rules with objectives other than the principle objective of trade liberalisation and non-discrimination against contracting parties. So, for example, the basic working conditions and social clauses which were adopted in 1998 by the ILO must be kept current within the framework of a working forum drawn from the ILO and the WTO and must be brought into the discussion and taken into consideration without necessarily changing the WTO rules. If we assume that fair and free world trading has been the basis for the increase in prosperity of many countries and their people, and particularly developing countries, then we must also realise that, as the largest trading power in the world, the European Union has a basic interest in building on this success story and involving more and more peoples and countries globally. For this we need allies. We must link our interests with those of the pre-accession states in Europe, of our neighbours in Europe and of the developing countries, in particular the ACP countries. Furthermore, we need constant dialogue with the government, Congress and people of the United States, which will clarify our motives and build mutual understanding for a reasonable balance of interests with our partner. Through increased trade we will contribute to the extension of world peace, to prosperity and, if we organise ourselves properly, to greater social justice. The extent of our responsibility determines our strategy. It must be comprehensive, it must strive for balance in the benefits gained worldwide and it must be convincing for our partners. Market participants must have the easiest possible access to all markets in the world. The rules in force for this must be fair and must be based on the mutual granting of advantages and imposition of duties. The four basic freedoms of the internal market – the freedom to move, the free movement of goods, the freedom of services and the free movement of capital – must also be objectives which are valid worldwide. We are in favour of the conclusion of a Multilateral Environmental Agreement, which should then be taken into consideration within the framework of the WTO. In the area of services, which, above all for European suppliers, is the largest growth market, market access should be improved and new areas should be included, concerning which the European Parliament should certainly be clearly heard. We are in favour of the permanent integration and promotion of electronic commerce within the framework of GATT. The resolutions of the Uruguay Round on government procurement must be applied. Long term, a large number of the bilateral investment protection agreements within the framework of the World Trade Organisation must be replaced by comprehensive multilateral regulation. Competition within the liberated markets must become more effective and competition authorities must be set up accordingly. The European agricultural model of rural sustainable agriculture, which is based on the preservation of rural areas, the environment and our quality produce, as well as the production of foodstuffs, should be retained. Opposition should be met with reference to the rapidly increasing support practice of the US government. Finally, a further word on development cooperation: it must be updated and expanded within the framework of the ACP Partnership. The world trade system is based, in key areas, on the contribution of Europeans and Americans. In the 60s, at the same time as introducing the common external tariff, we also adopted, in the various Kennedy Rounds and others, a consistent policy worldwide of reducing tariffs and opening up markets. The result was the opening up of new markets in third countries, but also the opening up of our markets for other industrial states. By way of conclusion, may I thank the Secretariat, our advisers and all those in Parliament who have worked together on this report. We had very little time and our technical and other departments worked magnificently. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE