Mr President, Commissioner, Mrs Berès, Mrs Peijs, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to say a few words about each of the reports, and also something about the previous speaker's comments of course. No matter what political group he or she might belong to, I would never insinuate that a fellow Member had let himself or herself be guided by anything but objective policy considerations in reaching a decision or deciding how to vote. The majorities that prevail may vary, but since I have been following its activities, the hallmark of the work of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs has been a very objective atmosphere and one very much geared to the Community's economic and monetary policy, so that the suggestion that has been made here is one that I cannot agree with and would like to refute. Nevertheless, I agree with you of course that within the euro area and also as regards our common foreign and security policy we need to speak with one voice, both internally and externally. However, and this point concerns both reports, competition is becoming an increasingly global matter. The euro will come into circulation in 89 days, and it is already the second most important currency in the world. The euro coins and notes will make the importance of this single European currency on the world market very clear. This is a very important aspect, and we must at all times be very disciplined about keeping Europe's presence on the world financial stage in mind. Global competition does of course require that in addition to the single market and economic and monetary union the necessary coordination needs to take place within the euro area and within the European Union as a whole. What does this mean? On the one hand it means coordination so that a strong internal market is created in the euro area and Europe becomes more competitive. On the other hand, you need to understand that it also involves maintaining freedom as the basis of competition within the framework agreed between the Member States. We are, of course, not all convinced that coordination in itself is a panacea, because we also need to consider where coordination starts. What mechanisms does coordination involve, and what are the limits of coordination? Does coordination inhibit the functioning of the market or support it? This is undisputedly a debate that we need to hold, as decisions cannot simply be taken under the heading of coordination. That is why we are in favour of more debates on European issues in national parliaments, in favour of coordination by the Statistical Office of the European Communities and enhanced links with national statistical bodies, and in favour of mutual exchange of information as a means of achieving joint tasks. However, we naturally oppose increased bureaucracy, the setting up of new bodies and higher expenditure on bureaucracy masquerading as coordination. We need more efficiency and professionalism in the structures that already exist in order to improve what we do jointly. That does not mean reducing freedom of action and freedom of decision making in the Member States. And we also oppose the information that has leaked out about tax collection or the use of tax income, because we believe that there is no legal basis for that either. I have simply highlighted two issues that we need to debate further. We will be voting for the report, but not all the details about what is meant and what mechanisms are necessary have been clarified. I would like to say one more thing to Mrs Berès: it is important that you have tackled the issue of the link between public finances and reducing inflation, and thus touched on the subject of assessing the financial markets. We need to give public finances a clean bill of health again, so that we increase the investment capital at our disposal, and I therefore call on everyone mentioned in the report to do their homework properly and not just take cosmetic measures!

Political group: PPE-DE