Mr President, I should like to point out that I see this morning's debate in the context of the European Union's ability to reform. I believe that it has become clear to all of us, following President Prodi's excellent speech, that the European Union's ability to reform and success in Nice are essential prerequisites for the European Union to move forward quickly. In my opinion, even today there are a number of Member States which have still not understood that this link exists, and that the slow progress in the Intergovernmental Conference might make it very difficult for us to bring about enlargement in the necessary time frame. We think that decisions need to be made in Nice on those issues which are necessary for enlargement, even if this means not addressing all those issues which remain to be resolved – and which it is desirable that we resolve – in connection with reforming the European Union. This report needs to be viewed in a similar light. In this report too, which I am presenting to you, there are a number of points which it is desirable that we in the European Union – but also the accession countries – address, but not all of them are conditions for accession to the European Union, because the conditions for accession to the European Union are clearly set out in the Copenhagen criteria. The European Parliament would nevertheless like to say that accession to the European Union is conditional upon the Copenhagen criteria being satisfied in full. There must be no political waiver for any country. It must be clear that all of these conditions have to be met. Furthermore, it must also be clear that democracy and the rule of law are in fact the condition for negotiating and that other conditions simply have to be satisfied in the course of the negotiations, and here we do of course realise that – in the interests of the accession applicants as well as in the interests of the European Union – we will have to agree transitional arrangements in a series of sectors, as we have always done with accessions. This does not amount to discrimination against anybody. I also think, however, that we should make it clear when we talk about the Copenhagen criteria that each individual country has to be assessed on the progress it has made. For this reason we should also make an official break with thinking in terms of groups. It is true that in Luxembourg and then in Helsinki countries were invited to hold bilateral negotiations. But for me the Luxembourg and Helsinki groups no longer exist; instead, each country has the opportunity – in accordance with the catch-up principle – of becoming a Member of the European Union very quickly, if it fulfils the requirements for membership of the European Union. That is why it is also wrong at the present time to mention the names of countries which look today as though they are in a position to fulfil the requirements, because for internal political reasons a country which is in a good position today might fall back again next year, or vice versa. For this reason, it must be clear that full satisfaction of the Copenhagen criteria is the only essential point. That is why I should like to propose to you that from next year we in Parliament no longer present a general report at all but only country reports, to make it clear that we wish to see the negotiations proceed at differentiated paces. An amendment is proposed by the Socialist Group to make it clear that the European Union will be capable of enlargement at the beginning of 2003. I think that this is a good proposal which should be supported, and an equally good proposal is that from the stating that if possible the first countries should be able to participate in the European Parliament elections in 2004. (Applause) I believe that if we take these two dates together then we are giving the people there something to aim for. I am convinced that some countries will be in a position to prepare themselves adequately within that time. When I consider that it is already eleven years since the revolution in central and eastern Europe then we must also give these people the prospect of the process of change bearing fruit at some point. We said: 'If you throw off the yoke of dictatorship then Europe's doors also stand open for you.' We must also take this seriously and not be forever finding new hurdles and difficulties, or new reasons to delay the unification process. I think therefore that holding out the prospect of accession to the people is essential, so as to encourage these countries to develop the enduring strength to push through political and economic reforms of the necessary magnitude. Although we need to discuss and resolve the issues relating to internal reform within the European Union in Nice, we will certainly not be able to avoid discussing Europe's borders either. We are now negotiating with 12 countries. We should also make offers to all the other countries. To make it clear that full membership is not the only possible way of being linked to the European Union at the outset, we also need to offer other kinds of cooperation – comparable to the European Economic Area in the past – covering economic and security policy issues. We should make offers of this kind. A country such as Ukraine cannot become a Member of the European Union today and perhaps not in the future either, but this country is so tremendously important for European development that we need to make sure that there is something on offer for it, as well as for many other countries. What I mean to say is that full membership should not remain the only means available for cooperating with the European Union. We will only be able to achieve all the objectives which I have mentioned so far if politicians and the elite both in the applicant countries and in the European Union – and in this limited context I agree with you, Commissioner – finally advertise the fact that the enlargement of the European Union is actually of benefit to Europe itself too. The political, economic and security policy stability which the enlargement of the European Union will bring is something which I certainly do not need to mention. European unity of this kind puts us in a position to create a zone of stability with a foundation so solid that it would have been barely possible at any other time in history, and we see that our aid is creating development opportunities in the accession countries which are enabling us to fund the reform process. On the other hand – and people hardly dare to say this – in recent years our balance of trade surplus with the accession countries has been greater than the public aid which we have granted these countries. We are beneficiaries of the enlargement of the European Union and should not always frighten people by only talking about cost. For once we should try telling the truth! (Applause) It is my privilege to be presenting this report on the tenth anniversary of German reunification. This German unity only became possible because trust had been built up through the unification of Europe. But I think that we also need to make it clear that we are now on the verge of seeing the unification of the whole of Europe. Because what we have called the European Union up until now only encompasses a small part of this continent. We have the opportunity to create a new order in which no one loses their identity and whose wealth is derived from the diversity of its people. We will also be able to fashion an order in which war between us becomes impossible, in which people are able to discover each other in their common humanity and in which we can combine our strengths to represent our interests in the world, that is to fight for our common cause as Europeans in the world. I hope that we have the inner strength to forget the trivialities and to achieve the overall objective. I would ask you to support this report. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE