Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, enlargement of the European Union is for me one of the greatest challenges of the next few years. I agree with the Commissioner that we should not get cold feet now, simply because we now have the difficult chapters to negotiate and each of the members and candidates are of course defending their own interests with vehemence and conviction. We should not lose sight of 2004, because the new Commission starts work in 2005 and the new commissioners from the new Member States would already have to be represented here by then. Whether there will be a ‘big bang’ – as we say – with the ten familiar countries, we do not know, but we should not cherish the hope, either, that we will be able to conduct several mini-rounds in the next few years. A bold step must be taken in 2004. At any rate, that remains our objective. Of course it would be easier for us if we had already implemented many reforms. But I do not see that as a major problem, because the fact that we are faced with the great task of enlargement may perhaps even result in reform, especially of agricultural and regional policy, being carried through with greater vehemence. I do not see any contradiction here. Have the candidate countries now satisfied all the criteria? As we see it, there is certainly still a lot to be done. In many countries transposition of the acquis communautaire is still far from adequate. Deciding things is one thing, putting them into practice is another. Many countries still have discriminatory rules regarding origin and gender, but that can be dealt with. Poor use is sometimes made of financial resources. But I also recall that even after accession my country, for example, did not take up and use all the financial resources it could have had from Brussels. We should not apply over strict criteria here. Something needs to be done about the promises concerning the environment, especially about the restructuring and closure of nuclear power plants, but some good progress has also been made. With good will, all these problems can be overcome in the months ahead. And I want to expressly say that I do not regard history, which in many cases was one of conflict and not of commonality, as a reason to block enlargement. If, on the one hand, the nationalists there are can see that the expulsions after 1945 were a consequence of the terrible Nazi dictatorship, and if the others recognise that today, I stress today, the expulsion of minorities as happened by the consensus of the victorious powers after the Second World War, is no longer consistent with our present understanding of minority rights, then this question, too, does not stand in the way of enlargement. Finally, we will not move forward without compromise. If, as sometimes happens, the EU Member States demand that the candidates fulfil all the criteria and that they reach the level of the Member States one hundred percent, or if they sometimes go even so far as to demand that they do better than the Member States, then of course enlargement will fail. It will also fail if the candidates demand to receive the full extent of all support measures right from the start. But we want success, success in 2004, no failure and no delay.

Political group: PSE