Parliament's new role and responsibilities in implementing the Lisbon Treaty - Institutional balance of the European Union - Relations between the European Parliament and national parliaments under the Treaty of Lisbon - Financial aspects of the Lisbon Treaty - Implementation of the citizens' initiative (debate) President We are going to resume the sitting with a very important subject: the joint debate on the Treaty of Lisbon, which includes the following reports: the report by Mr Leinen, on behalf of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, on Parliament's new role and responsibilities in implementing the Treaty of Lisbon, the report by Mr Dehaene, on behalf of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, on the impact of the Treaty of Lisbon on the development of the institutional balance of the European Union, the report by Mr Brok, on behalf of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, on the development of the relations between the European Parliament and national parliaments under the Treaty of Lisbon, the report by Mrs Guy-Quint, on behalf of the Committee on Budgets, on the financial aspects of the Treaty of Lisbon, and the report by Mrs Kaufmann, on behalf of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, requesting the Commission to submit a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the implementation of the citizens' initiative. As you can see, these are five extremely important reports dealing with an issue that is highly topical, and we should also bear in mind the fact that, as you know, the senate of the Czech Republic has approved the ratification of the Treaty by the majority required. Jo Leinen rapporteur. - (DE) Mr President, Vice-President, ladies and gentlemen, the final evening sitting of this legislative period is devoted to the debate on the Treaty of Lisbon. We know that many evening sittings have preceded this one in our effort to bring about a Reform Treaty and its ratification in 26 parliaments of the Member States. I should like to express my congratulations and my appreciation to the Members in the Czech Senate, who today supported this Treaty with a clear majority. I would also like to thank all those who helped to remove this obstacle. (Applause) Yes, let us applaud the Czech Senate all the way from Strasbourg to Prague. We are very pleased with this outcome. I am very optimistic that we will be able to complete the ratification procedure towards the end of the year. We must not count our chickens before they are hatched, but everything would seem to indicate that we will get 27 ratifications. The Committee on Constitutional Affairs was therefore right to be optimistic. The European Council, the Commission and the European Parliament must prepare for the entry into force of the Treaty. I am very happy that this House has adopted four eminently interesting and important reports - no, five reports, as Mrs Guy-Quint also presented a report on the financial aspects of the Treaty of Lisbon - as a kind of final act of this legislative period. I see that this House never gave up on the Reform Treaty, even in difficult times. That is not true of everyone, though. I cannot understand why there was so much hesitation in this House and why so many doubts were expressed as to whether we should still be discussing Lisbon at all. This debate was even hidden in the evening sitting, when it could quite easily have taken place during the daytime. It is beneath the dignity of this House to postpone such a debate to the evening sitting. We know why it happened. They did not want this House to reaffirm its conviction in front of a large audience that we need this Treaty, that we want it and that we believe in it. There were sceptics at the very highest levels of this Parliament, which I find absolutely incomprehensible and totally unacceptable. I took on the report on Parliament's role in implementing the Treaty of Lisbon and I can say that this Parliament will be one of the winners under the Reform Treaty. We are taking a quantum leap in democratic control, whether in terms of legislation, or budgetary control and decision-making, or the control and even the election of the executive, of the Commission, or the approval of international agreements, or new rights of initiative that we are granted, the most prominent example being the right of the European Parliament to suggest amendments to the Treaty - a privilege previously reserved to the Member States and their governments. Codecision as standard puts us on an equal footing with the Council of Ministers: agricultural policy, fisheries policy, research policy, structural regulations - much will now lie within the joint responsibility and codecision power of this House. We have new supervisory powers, new rights to information and new powers of initiative. Vice-President, I thank you for always standing alongside us. Today has been a good day and, with the four reports, as a kind of final act, we close a period full of dedication to reforming the European Union. It is my hope that the final act will be played out with the new Parliament and that we can enter the new legislative period on new, stronger foundations. (Applause) Jean-Luc Dehaene rapporteur. - (NL) Mr President, Vice-President, ladies and gentlemen, the approval of the Treaty of Lisbon by the Czech Senate is a further important step towards ratification of the Treaty. It is, therefore, a positive thing that the European Parliament is, this evening, approving a number of reports setting out Parliament's position regarding the implementation of the Treaty. After all, it is necessary for Parliament to be equally well prepared as the other institutions before entering into talks and negotiations with them on the implementation and application of the Treaty. This is all the more important for Parliament, given that its powers will be substantially extended under this treaty. Therefore, Parliament has a strong interest in seeing that a) it is well prepared to carry out its new tasks fully - as set out in the reports by Mr Leinen and Mrs Guy-Quint, and that b) it adopts a clear position regarding its relationship with the other institutions, which is the subject of my report. The Treaty of Lisbon strengthens and clarifies the institutional balance within the Union. The Treaty on European Union, which we hope to see adopted, marks a formal end to the pillar structure. In addition, the European Union will acquire a legal personality; Community institutions will become Union institutions and, under the Treaty, the roles and powers of each of the institutions will be clearly defined. The Treaty will also thereby put an end to the twofold position of the European Council, making it an autonomous institution of the Union. Although it is still subject to too many exceptions, the application of the codecision procedure, which will become the ordinary legislative procedure and which will also include approval of the budget, will give Parliament a very important role. As a matter of fact, the powers of the Council and Parliament have been formulated identically in the Treaty. The Treaty thereby strengthens the Community method and transforms it into the Union method. Furthermore, that method will be extended to the former Justice and Home Affairs pillar. In my report, I have emphasised the fact that robust coordination of legislative and budgetary work will be required if the institutions are to operate efficiently. The report calls for programming of the legislative work, including the multi-annual perspective of the budget. The role of the General Affairs Council within the Council of Ministers will be very important, in that it needs to become the Presidency of the Council's instrument for dialogue with Parliament. The Commission's role as initiative-taker is also clearly upheld; unfortunately, the plan is to reduce the number of commissioners, so as to arrive at a smaller college. This will require the Commission to strengthen its internal organisation all the more, if it is to function as a college. One important new feature is that the twin role of the new High Representative and Vice-President of the Commission will be crucial when it comes to foreign affairs, external affairs and security. In my report, I have stressed that it would be very much in his or her interest to work closely with the Commission, so that all of the Union's foreign policy resources can be mobilised. I would like to conclude by saying that we will have a very difficult period of transition following the elections, as well as a difficult transition from the Treaty of Nice, which must be applied first, to the Treaty of Lisbon, which will hopefully be approved by the end of the year. I call on Parliament and the Council to once again consider together how we might organise this period and I fail to understand why this has not been more the case already. Otherwise, we risk ending up in a situation after the elections where we do not know what exactly should be happening. Since no one would be served by such a situation, let us agree clearly on that. Elmar Brok rapporteur. - (DE) Mr President, Vice-President, representatives of the Czech Presidency, ladies and gentlemen, as the previous speakers have said, this is a great moment, not because our reports are being discussed, but because today it has been established that the parliaments of 26 countries have ratified the Treaty of Lisbon, and that a referendum, which has been promised, still has to be carried out in just one country. That the parliaments of 26 countries have ratified the Treaty of Lisbon shows that it is a parliamentary treaty. A great deal of progress has been made over the course of the unification of the European Union, but there has never been a treaty like the Treaty of Lisbon, in which the parliaments - both the European Parliament and the national parliaments - have been strengthened, democracy has been strengthened, a citizens' initiative has been introduced and the principle of subsidiarity has been politically and legally strengthened through the strengthening of national parliaments. It is therefore astonishing that those who set themselves up as founders of democracy oppose this treaty. They oppose the Treaty of Lisbon because they do not wish to accord the process of European unification any democratic legitimacy. European unification is abhorrent to them and they are afraid that this Europe could gain popularity through greater democracy and transparency and also enhanced decision-making abilities to face the challenges of the future. That is why they tell the lies that they tell. May I also say at this point that I would like to thank the Czech Presidency and, in particular, Prime Minister Topolánek, who, in a situation that was personally difficult for him and for which he was not responsible, on the last day of his term of office fought to get a sufficient majority in the Czech Senate. And it was no meagre majority; it was 54:20. That is a gigantic lead for those who said yes to the Treaty of Lisbon. I hope that, after all 26 elected assemblies have made their decision, administrative people do not hold up the democratic process by withholding their signature. I believe that they will keep the promises they have given and that this Treaty will be signed. We are seeing in the discussions in this election campaign that the financial crisis has shown that each country that acts alone in this global order is lost. That is why it is extraordinarily important that this is recognised in Ireland and that - if I am to believe the opinion polls - the people of Ireland rethink their position so that the interests of Ireland can be defended. I am sure that, through the social clause, through the commitment to a social market economy and not to predatory capitalism, in other words through commitment in the social sense, this is also a Treaty for ordinary citizens. In this way, we can defend our interests in this world together. In order to really exercise control over an administrative bureaucracy, national governments, the Commission or the Council apparatus here in Brussels and in Strasbourg, we must establish close cooperation between the European Parliament and national parliaments. There are many common tasks in foreign and security policy, in legal and home affairs policy, in the control of Europol. There are many opportunities open to national parliaments through their right of veto. With the orange and yellow cards and the right of action they have possibilities in the field of subsidiarity control and, as Members of the Council, they can exercise more control over their own governments. In this way, they are doubly legitimised democratically. That is why the European Parliament and the national parliaments are not opponents in this process but allies, desirous of exercising joint democratic control over Europe, of taking it forward, and of not allowing it to degenerate into a Europe controlled by apparatchiks. The Treaty of Lisbon is therefore right and proper, and national parliaments and the European Parliament will not shirk this responsibility. Catherine Guy-Quint Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is a great pleasure for me this evening to present the report on the financial aspects of the Treaty of Lisbon, which has been ready for some time now in the Committee on Budgets. This will be the last budgetary report of this parliamentary term and my last parliamentary report. Above all, I am very pleased to see that Parliament has had the courage to present our reports in the 'Lisbon' package to honour the promise made to the citizens to inform them of the consequences of this treaty. A betterinformed citizen is a citizen who votes in full knowledge of the facts. Speaking about the Treaty of Lisbon in this House is not a denial of democracy, rather the contrary. Its implementation will have major consequences for the budgetary powers of the institutions and financial implications. The reform is in fact important for Parliament. Apart from the introduction of multiannual financial frameworks, it should be remembered that the budgetary procedure has remained practically unchanged since 1975. It was therefore essential for the Committee on Budgets to analyse these modifications and verify that they were the conditions needed for our institution to maintain, even strengthen, its role as a budgetary authority. That is the whole thrust of this report: simplification and clarification of the budgetary challenges of the Treaty. My main desire was to defend the prerogatives of the parliamentary institution. Future Members must not be dispossessed of their powers in future budgetary procedures and future negotiations on the multiannual financial framework. These substantial modifications are of three types. First of all, modifications to the primary legislation. The new budgetary procedure includes real advances and new challenges for Parliament with, firstly, the removal of the distinction between compulsory expenditure and non-compulsory expenditure. Next, the single reading for the budgetary procedure with the introduction of a revert mechanism in the event that the Council rejects the common position, the introduction of a conciliation committee responsible for preparing the common position and a tight timetable for the conciliation committee. In addition, changes are made to the new multiannual financial framework that strengthen Parliament's role. This framework is becoming restrictive. To be adopted, it requires unanimity in the Council and the consent of the European Parliament. I would add that its adoption is the result of an entirely new and special procedure. With regard to the new financial perspectives, we want them to have a five-year lifespan to coincide with Parliament's and the European Commission's terms of office. The commissioners will thus be more accountable for the budgetary choices that they make. Codecision is extended to the adoption of the Financial Regulation and to its methods of application. Unfortunately, however, the decision on own resources remains with the Council. Parliament is merely consulted, except on the methods of application. Budgetary discipline, therefore, returns in part to Parliament, which can reject the multiannual financial framework. This is real progress. The challenge for the future Parliament is to know what will be negotiated under the new Financial Regulation procedure, the responsibility for which Parliament shares, and what will fall under the legislation for the new regulation on the Interinstitutional Agreement, which Parliament will have the right merely to reject or accept. Finally, the Union's new responsibilities will create new funding requirements. First of all there will be the External Relations package with, in particular, the creation of the European External Action Service and the High Representative Vice-President of the Commission, and, then, the new policies: energy, space and tourism, research, civil defence, administrative cooperation, and sport. Ladies and gentlemen, as you will have understood, the changes implied by the Treaty of Lisbon are important. Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann rapporteur. - (DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this is my last speech in the plenary sitting of the European Parliament and, as rapporteur of the European Citizens' Initiative, I am pleased to have been given the floor. I hope that tomorrow, during the last sitting of this legislative period, Parliament will send a political signal, that it will set a course towards bringing Europe closer to its citizens, and that it will move ahead with a project that has been close to my heart for many years. Let me start by making a number of observations. I realise with regret that neither my Group nor my Party - and here I am choosing my words carefully - was able to support the Citizens' Initiative. While, on the one hand, no opportunity is missed to complain about the democratic deficit in the EU, on the other, there is a general refusal to take the serious steps to make the European project more democratic. This is behaviour that is neither credible nor forward-looking. It blocks the progress in Europe that the citizens have insisted on for such a long time and I cannot and will not accept it. Before the end of my mandate I would like to thank all my fellow Members of the Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe and the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance who have supported me with my report. I would like to thank Jo Leinen, the Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, and, in particular, all the coordinators and shadow rapporteurs of these four Groups. I thank you that we worked together so well across party and country boundaries and that we were able to advance the European integration project together. Vice-President, the provision contained in the Treaty of Lisbon concerning the Citizens' Initiative is without doubt a milestone in the European integration process. The truth is that, in the European Union, it is not states we want to unite, but people. This matter will be addressed in a totally new way if, as laid down for the first time in Article 11(4) of the Treaty on European Union (EU Treaty, new version n.v.), citizens are directly involved in the European legislative process. One million citizens will then have the right to ask the Commission to present a specific draft regulation or directive, which the Council has had since 1957 and the European Parliament since 1993. In my report, Parliament presented key points and guidelines for a future regulation on conditions and procedures for a European Citizens' Initiative. Vice-President, in the event of the Treaty of Lisbon coming into force, I expect the Commission not only to present a proposal as quickly as possible but also to follow the guidelines of my report if at all possible. In particular, the Commission should endorse the view of Parliament, which reflects the view of a significant number of Member States within the meaning of Article 11(4) of the EU Treaty (n.v.). In my report, the number 7 is proposed. It is essential that not just any arbitrary figure is established, as it must, first, be able to justify the associated restriction of the right of EU citizens to equal participation in a Citizens' Initiative, whatever their nationality, and, second, it must be oriented towards the relevant objective. This means that the establishment of a minimum number of Member States must ensure that the starting point in the European legislative process is not an issue that reflects the specific interests of a single Member State, but rather one that is consistent with the European general interest. In addition, I ask that particular attention is paid to the structure of the procedure, especially the question of the admissibility of a Citizens' Initiative. The criteria of friendliness towards citizens and legal security must be given top priority. If EU citizens codetermine the European legislative process and wish to introduce a Citizens' Initiative, fairness essentially requires that the competent EU bodies state as soon as possible and in a binding manner whether the planned initiative fulfils the legal requirements of the Treaty. It is absolutely vital that this takes place before the statements of support are collected, as the Member States that provide the necessary resources need legal security. Finally, I should like to remind the House that the provisions of the Citizens' Initiative did not fall from the sky. They were already in the Constitutional Treaty, as they had been developed in the Constitutional Convention, at the signing of which some Members were present, in close cooperation with NGOs. Their inclusion in the Convention's draft Constitution was neither a sure-fire thing nor the result of chance. They represent the results of intensive consultations between the members of the Convention and NGOs committed to democratic policy. We now know that this idea has been on ice for six years. It is high time that it is brought to life after such a long time. The time has come for direct democracy in a united Europe. (Applause) Margot Wallström Vice-President of the Commission. - Mr President, first of all, allow me to say a special 'thank you' to all the rapporteurs. I admire very much your commitment and, could I say, perseverance. Maybe it is because I recognise what my husband would call stubbornness in your insisting on these issues being dealt with in this Parliament that I also feel very much at ease and have established excellent cooperation with all of you. A special thanks to those of you who will leave. You have not only been very good collaborators and partners in all of this but also good friends and good sports. Thank you very much. I think, Mrs Kaufmann, that you can be proud of helping to establish what I call establishing and charging the power lines between citizens and the European institutions - new power lines, drawing them up and charging them. I think that is quite something. I am, of course, delighted d to be able to take part in this debate tonight on the day when the Czech Republic has completed its parliamentary ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. Today's vote brings to 26 the number of Member States whose parliaments have backed the Treaty. This debate, I think, offers a good opportunity to remind European citizens of the role of the Treaty of Lisbon in delivering a more democratic and coherent European Union. At a time of economic crisis it is more important than ever to have a Europe that works well, that has the right systems to ensure democracy. The Treaty would give to the EU's democratic institutions, most obviously this Parliament, the powers they need. It would help the EU to act with greater unity and coherence on the world stage. It would allow Europe to deliver more effectively on the key challenges we face today in areas like climate change and energy security. The reports we are discussing tonight will also help to ensure that, with the Treaty in place, its implementation will be swifter and smoother. Good cooperation between the institutions will be critical in securing the maximum benefits from the Treaty, and the Commission is committed to working in partnership with Parliament and the other institutions to make this happen. The Irish referendum was a sharp reminder of the need to anchor the case for Europe within the national debate. The substantive concerns underlying the vote deserve to be taken seriously - and that was exactly what happened at the European Council last December. The legal guarantees and the decision on the size of the Commission show the respect given by Europe's political leadership to the result in Ireland and the will to understand the reasons why they voted 'no' and respond to those concerns. But it also showed that they remained convinced that this Treaty is right for Europe. That is also why, since the vote, eight more Member States have concluded their parliamentary proceedings, with eight more 'yeses'. Parliament's reports add up to a comprehensive analysis of key aspects of the Treaty. The underlying approach is to be ambitious for what the Treaty can achieve for the EU - an approach fully shared by the Commission. The reports are particularly valuable in deepening our thinking on how the Treaty should work in practice. In their different ways, the five reports all show a strong, self-confident Parliament looking for ways to maximise the potential of the Treaty for improving the effectiveness, efficiency and accountability of EU action, to the benefit of voters and citizens. Mr Dehaene's report sets out a lot of important detail, and the Commission very widely shares the interpretations it makes of the Treaty. The great strength of the report lies in the clarity with which it shows that implementing the Treaty is not reinforcing one institution at the expense of another - the European Union can only deliver what citizens expect if all Institutions are strong and cooperate effectively. The report pays particular attention to the issue of transition, and there would have been many advantages in having the Treaty in force before this year of institutional transition. Unfortunately, that has not been possible. So a pragmatic and flexible approach is needed, finding a sensible way forward which will take into account the need to avoid any institutional vacuum this year; the importance of ensuring that the next Commission will enjoy the full authority of a democratic mandate; and the need to respect the role of the Parliament. The Dehaene report sets out a model which will help us all to find the way forward. Mr Dehaene's report calls for political and gender balance to be taken into consideration, together with geographical and demographic balance, in the appointment of EU top posts. In today's Europe, where more than 50% are women, they are still under-represented in politics. This Commission - as you know - has the highest number of women commissioners ever. Still, this is not enough. Improving the gender balance should be an objective when the next Commission is appointed: an objective that can be achieved if there is strong political support from the next Parliament. I also hope that we will have more women in the European Parliament and in top EU posts. Without them, we all lose out on their knowledge, experience and ideas. Mrs Guy-Quint's report tackles another important issue: how to organise the Union's financial planning cycle for the best use of the EU budget, putting the money where the political priorities are. At a time of intense pressure on public finances, we must have the right procedures in place to deliver best value for money. The balance between stability and responsiveness in budget planning is critical to effective EU planning, and the Commission will return to this in the budget review. Mr Leinen's report shows how the Treaty will affect the work of Parliament, and the report covers very thoroughly the implications for Parliament of new policy areas, new powers and new procedures. For example, it underlines the importance of ensuring adequate scrutiny of the Union's external action, and we are certainly open to identifying the appropriate methods to do so. However, these methods can only be agreed once the Vice-President and High Representative has taken office. On this, as in many of the other issues raised - including comitology and delegated acts - we look forward to more detailed exchanges with Parliament on implementing all of the issues raised. Let me turn to the report of Mrs Kaufmann, which explains clearly how the Citizens' Initiative can bring a new dimension to democracy in the Union. Citizens will be able to call on the Commission to bring forward new policy initiatives. This is one of the areas where the Commission intends to act swiftly once the Treaty is in force - also on the basis of consultation - to understand stakeholders' and citizens' expectations. The Commission's thinking is very much in line with the recommendations of Mrs Kaufmann. There are, however, a few areas we should discuss further. We want to strike the right balance between a procedure that is easy for citizens and one that means that initiatives will have legitimacy and weight. For example, on the minimum number of Member States, we should also more closely reflect the type of procedure foreseen in the Treaty. Finally, Mr Brok's report covers an area in which both Parliament and the Commission have made important strides in recent years: relations with national parliaments. This Parliament has pioneered the use of inter-parliamentary conferences and has found some very practical ways to build up a real parliamentary network. The Commission, as you know, has set up a completely new dialogue mechanism with national parliaments, and this is an area where a lot of progress has been made. Since 2006, the Commission has sent to parliaments not only consultation papers, but also legislative proposals, inviting them to respond. So far, we have received and replied to around 400 opinions, and we have also massively increased the number of direct contacts, with more than 500 meetings between Commissioners and national parliamentary bodies since the Commission came into office. So, as the report implies, the Treaty's new provisions on national parliaments will be fully in tune with the trend of recent years, and I think will reinforce the European parliamentary family still further. Taken together, these reports illustrate how the Treaty of Lisbon would deepen European democracy and deliver results to European citizens. That is an excellent message for us to take into the European Parliament elections, as well as being an excellent launch pad for preparing for the implementation of the Treaty itself. President Before I give the floor to the speakers, I am going to allow myself a certain degree of licence that I think may be granted to someone chairing the sitting at this stage of our term of office and this stage of the night, for it is true that these late-night sittings have an advantage. I would like to tell you that I intend to forward immediately to the President of Parliament and the Bureau a proposal that they prepare a publication containing the Treaty of Lisbon itself, the five reports and the corresponding resolutions, together with the introductory speeches by the rapporteurs and by the Commissioner. I believe that a document of this kind, translated into the EU's 23 official languages and distributed to the men and women of the 27 Member States, would be a very important document in terms of understanding the importance of the Treaty of Lisbon itself, and also understanding the efforts made and the actions taken by Parliament. It would also be a deserved tribute to the five rapporteurs, particularly to Mrs Guy-Quint and Mrs Kaufmann, who have told us that they are leaving Parliament but who will be always present in our memories and to whom we will always extend our gratitude. Michael Gahler draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. - (DE) Mr President, to celebrate the occasion, as you see, I have consciously taken the place of Mr Zahradil. On behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs I would like to stress that we regard the future Vice-President of the Commission and High Representative as fully accountable to Parliament for the simple reason that, like all other Commissioners, he needs the confidence of Parliament to take office. The current practice of regular political dialogue in plenary and in the Committee on Foreign Affairs must be preserved in the dual function exercised by a single person. As the vast majority of us want a more uniform and hands-on approach by the European Union towards foreign policy, the future incumbent of this office will also have a self-interest in securing the support of the European Parliament for his actions. The political plans and positions of our executive can also be regularly debated in the Committee on Foreign Affairs in meetings where the future Chairman of the Permanent Representatives Committee provides information on issues that are debated in the PRC. If so requested, this practice must also apply to the special representatives. In future, posting decisions in the field of security and defence policy should also be discussed by Parliament to give operations in third countries greater democratic legitimacy. As regards the European External Action Service, we are of the opinion that the European Parliament must be fully involved in preparatory operations. We affirm that this Service should be assigned to the Commission for administrative purposes. We also want to succeed in ensuring that, in future, the head of an EU delegation in a third country appears before the Committee on Foreign Affairs before the posting is finally confirmed. I think that, if a person does not make a good impression on his or her own Members there should be little chance of that person being posted abroad. We also ask that the entire foreign policy of the European Union, including the common security and defence policy, be financed in future from the Community budget. However, for the next treaty after the Treaty of Lisbon, I would also like to see common military expenditure appearing in the budget. Andrew Duff rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. - Mr President, as the previous speakers have said, the development of common foreign, security and defence policies is one of the greatest prizes that is prospectively in our grasp as a result of the Treaty. So national parliaments are greatly affected by the changes afoot. Of course they retain national responsibilities for national security but they should also be required to play a leading part in close and regular collaboration with the European Parliament in scrutinising and seeking to formulate a common European policy, criticising and interrogating their own ministers for performance in Council and in transmitting to the press and public something of the new reality, which is that foreign policy is best made by seeking out, finding and projecting the common European interest. Thijs Berman draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Development. - (NL) Mr President, the Czech Senate has today accepted the Treaty of Lisbon. Now, there is just Ireland to go, you may say, and then we will have a treaty that will also provide more opportunities for my Committee on Development to make better policy. However, pressurising Ireland now would be a tremendous mistake. This is a union of independent states and the Irish are free to make their own decisions. Any outside pressure will increase the risk of the whole EU exploding, because, despite all the fine and complacent words that have been voiced today in this House, the European Union is undergoing a deep crisis of confidence. This kind of crisis can only be resolved with results, social policy, investment and economic recovery, the provision of clean energy for our climate, the protection of social rights, here and elsewhere in the world, but, in achieving all of this, we must respect each Member State's right to come up with effective solutions for itself. Cooperation is necessary, and that is certainly true in this crisis, too, but you also have to have the confidence to remain true to yourselves. Therefore, pressure on Ireland would not be appropriate, either for the Irish or for the rest of Europe. Let the EU behave modestly, so that it may benefit from great ambitions. DanutBudreikaitė draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Development. - (LT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to underline that the Treaty of Lisbon will give the European Union more opportunities to take the initiative in shaping development coordination policy, to improve donor coordination, to allocate tasks and provide aid more effectively. However, it also means that EU institutions, including Parliament, will have to take on greater responsibility. To implement development cooperation policy successfully, it is essential to have the appropriate administrative structure to remove the existing inconsistencies of the directorate-general structures and competences within the Commission on aspects of policy and budget, and to give sole competence to the Directorate-General for Development Cooperation. As development cooperation policy will be applied according to the usual procedure, it is essential to define very precisely the remit of the European Parliament's Committee on Development Cooperation. The Treaty of Lisbon will allow better implementation of development cooperation policy goals with the aim of reducing and ultimately eradicating world poverty. Georgios Papastamkos draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on International Trade. - (EL) Mr President, as draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on International Trade, I should like to point out that the changes introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon in the area of the common commercial policy contribute overall to the enhancement of its democratic legitimacy, transparency and efficacy of the Union's external action. I would underline in particular the redefinition of the institutional balance within the Union with the promotion of the European Parliament to colegislator for the purpose of defining the application framework of the common commercial policy. Parliament's approval will also be required for all trade agreements concluded. However, I should like to highlight the imbalance between the internal and external competence of Parliament, in foro interno and in foro externo, in connection with the common commercial policy, given that the Treaty of Lisbon does not provide Parliament with the right to approve the mandate of the Commission to negotiate a trade agreement. Considering that Parliament is entitled nonetheless to lay down preconditions to its approval of the Union's trade agreements, I consider an enhanced framework agreement to be necessary here for relations between Parliament and the European Commission. Finally, I should like to highlight the need for more intense dialogue between the European Parliament and the national parliaments, given that all the matters covered by the common commercial policy will come under the Union's sole jurisdiction. All trade agreements will be agreements with the Union and there will no longer be any mixed agreements concluded by both the Union and the Member States. Evelyne Gebhardt draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection. - (DE) Mr President, in the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection we also see the enormous advantages of the Treaty of Lisbon, which we would not want to miss out on, notably in the area of consumer protection. It is very interesting to note that, in the Treaty of Lisbon, consumer protection has become a cross-sectional task, which naturally gives this area much greater strength. This area is especially important to the citizens of the European Union, as we can show them on a daily basis what the European Union does for them. The citizens continually ask what the European Union does for them. That this is now anchored in Article 12 and not in Article one hundred and something is also important as it means that the value of consumer protection has been enhanced a great deal. I think it is good that we will have the Treaty of Lisbon. I am very pleased that the Prague Senate has also ratified the Treaty. This has sent a clear message that we are for this Europe, a social Europe, a Europe of citizens, which we wish to equip for the future. Thank you for allowing us to demonstrate this once again today. A special thanks to you, Mrs Kaufmann, for your very good work in the Convention. You have achieved something very important there. Oldřich Vlasák draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Regional Development. - (CS) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of the Committee on Regional Development, I would like to introduce a territorial dimension into the discussions on the Treaty of Lisbon. It is a fact that individual local authorities, municipalities, and regions must cope, on a growing scale, with the impact of European law and European policies. In connection with this, a survey by Utrecht University has shown that Community bodies annually adopt more than 100 regulations with an immediate impact on local authorities. Seventy per cent of the legislation and measures we produce must actually be implemented in regions, towns, and local communities. That is why the controversial Treaty of Lisbon may be perceived positively from the perspective of local authorities. In actual fact, the Treaty of Lisbon contains a subsidiarity protocol, in other words a protocol under which the adoption of a norm at a higher level, in this case the European level, can be justified only when such a measure is demonstrably more efficient and more necessary. Under the treaty, more effective consultations with local and regional authorities and their associations are required. Another provision that would be introduced is the obligation of the European Commission to minimise the financial and administrative burden of each new legal regulation. These measures should ensure that Brussels will be more attentive to the real problems confronting mayors and better prepared to solve them. I would also like to stress here that this is quite definitely not the last change to primary law that we will be discussing. Therefore, we should start thinking carefully about the changes that have to be made in order to render the EU's legal foundations comprehensible, firm, and beneficial to all citizens. Ladies and gentlemen, I would not like to judge the positive and negative aspects of the Treaty of Lisbon here. You all know that the Czech Republic's view is critical yet realistic. This has been corroborated by today's debate in the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, which then approved the treaty later in the day. Johannes Voggenhuber draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. - (DE) Mr President, I speak on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. I am a bit irritated, as I would also like to know the opinion of the Committee on Development, but Mr Berman used his speaking time to warn us against exerting pressure on the people of Ireland. This mentality is clearly one of the reasons why we are debating tonight. I find myself wondering whether this Parliament still has the right to speak with its citizens, to exchange arguments, to defend the results of its 10 year's work on the constitutional process, or whether with this dialogue we will be accused of the exertion of pressure and blackmail. It is a rum old world. I would have liked Parliament to have defended this treaty much more vociferously, much more offensively and much more openly to the citizens of the European Union and not to have left everything entirely up to governments, which all too often have a rather ambivalent relationship with the progress embodied in this treaty. Mr President, many Eurosceptics claim that the democratic progress embodied in this treaty is slight and that, in fact, it is a fig leaf for a dark and more sinister Europe hidden behind it. I believe that a brief glance at the area of internal security, justice and the police, its communitarisation, Parliament's right of codetermination, the application of the Charter, punishes these assertions and unmasks them as deception, propaganda and ignorance. For me, this area is still perhaps the most annoying expression of the democratic deficit in the European Union. I have never been one to consider the separation of powers a historical philosophical principle; rather it is a basic principle of democracy. In this area, the Treaty of Lisbon has provided a very decisive, forward-looking response. It is one of the most sensitive areas in the constitution. In reality, in this area, ministers of police have made decisions on police laws - behind closed doors - without the control of the courts or the European Court of Justice and without the application of a comprehensive code of basic rights and freedoms. This is changing, however, and it is a huge step forward in the direction of a European democracy. Moreover, Mr Berman, to discuss it with the citizens, to defend it, is our duty and not the exertion of pressure. (Applause) President I am going to have the pleasure of giving the floor to my compatriot, Mr Carnero González. He is another Member who will not be with us in the next term of office, and I would like to thank him publicly for the enormous efforts and extremely laudable work he has accomplished within the specific area and on the issue that we are dealing with here. Carlos Carnero González draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Petitions. - (ES) Thank you, Mr President, and friend, for those kind words that, obviously, are emotionally affecting at a time when I am in the House for the last time in this term of office, to thank for their collaboration all those with whom I have had the honour of working and, also, to ask forgiveness for any mistakes I may have made. I have tried to do my best for the citizens of my country and all Europeans, and there have been periods during this work that have been truly special, such as the Convention. In fact, we are talking today about citizenship and I am speaking on behalf of the Committee on Petitions. Which committee in this Parliament is closer to the citizens than the Committee on Petitions? It safeguards one of the most important rights enjoyed by European citizens, namely, the right of petition. The issue is this: if the European Parliament is known in many countries, it is through the exercise of the right of petition. We, as members of the Committee on Petitions, know this, and in fact the entire House knows this. The Treaty of Lisbon, which makes the European Union more democratic and more effective, is bringing in new elements, such as the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and new instruments, such as the citizens' initiative. The issue is to avoid confusion, for example, between the right of petition and the citizens' initiative right. I would like to point out that, for instance, citizens may demand, through a petition, that Parliament request the Commission to take a legislative initiative, so that in the future we might have a European citizens' initiative calling on the Commission to institute a legislative procedure and a petition, on the basis of the right of petition, addressed to the relevant committee of this House, asking the House to approach the Commission to that effect. We need to avoid this contradiction and to seek synergy that reinforces both routes, which are routes that make citizenship more concrete within the EU. Of course, the Committee on Petitions would like to be involved in the administration of this right of citizens' initiative. Of course, all the committees would like to be involved, but I would ask that this right be made effective in the best possible way. I believe that this would also be a tribute to a day like today, which is so important: the Treaty of Lisbon has been ratified by the senate of the Czech Republic, so there is just one step left before this Treaty becomes a reality and, in fact, before this Treaty, which is the heir to the European Constitution, the best text produced by the EU to date, enters into force. If we succeed in this, all of us who are here - starting with all the members of the Convention who are here tonight - will have made a huge contribution to the usefulness of having been a Member of this Parliament. Maria da Assunção Esteves on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - Mr President, this is my last speech in the plenary, so it is a bit different. A day will come when federal and cosmopolitan parliaments will join to govern the world. The dream of a shared humanity without frontiers is being born right here in this place of representation, where freedom grows stronger and democracy grows wider. The Enlightenment's visionary idea of a union of peoples gives the first steps within the magic of our rooms and our debates. In this union Machiavelli weakens,
{'language': 'en'}