Santer, President-designate of the Commission. — (FR) MrPresident, ladies and gentlemen, today, for the first time in thehistory of our Community, you are being called upon to passformal judgement on the investiture of a new Commission —you, the representatives of the peoples of the Member States ofthe European Union, amongst them the peoples of Austria,Finland and Sweden, to whom I extend a warm welcome, andto whom I wish to say: we are glad that you will henceforth beaccompanying us on the great adventure that is the unificationof Europe.

This formal vote marks the beginning of a new era in relationsbetween the European Parliament and the Commission. And Iwelcome it, because the European Union will thereby takeanother step along the road towards increased democratization,and because your endorsement will give greater legitimacy tothe Commission over which I am to preside. Europe needs astrong Commission and a strong Parliament, in order to be ableto defend the common interest. That is our duty, and that is ourintent. The new Commission will be a political institution, inthe best sense of the term: it will serve the common good. AndI have sensed among you the same determination to placeyourselves at the service of the citizens and peoples of Europe.You will find us to be partners in dialogue who are inspired bya spirit of constructiveness and are ready to be accountable toyou. In our endeavours, we shall benefit from the immensework carried out by Jacques Delors and his colleagues.Throughout his ten years at the head of the Commission,Jacques Delors demonstrated just what vision combined withskill and a sense of duty can achieve. On this day of suchimportance to Europe, I am sure you will wish to join with mein saying: thank you, Jacques Delors. Thank you, with all ourheart. You deserve well of the Union to which you have givenso much.

(Apphuxf)

Personally, I am proud to be able to succeed Jacques Delors asPresident of an institution which is vital to the future ofEurope.

Over the last five years, a number of momentous events havetaken place in Europe. Germany has been reunified. Commu-nism has collapsed. Nevertheless, in the words of VaclavHavel: 'everything is possible, but nothing is certain'. Onceagain, we are witnessing the resurgence of extreme nationalistsentiments, which are sometimes leading to the outbreak ofbloody conflicts, such as that taking place in former Yugosla-via. I draw one major conclusion from this tragedy: more thanever, the European Union must remain a haven of peace andprosperity for the entire continent. Firstly, we must preserveand build on what we have achieved over the last 50 years. Thefact that war between our peoples has become unthinkable isnothing short of a miracle. To squander this inheritance wouldbe a crime against ourselves.

At the same time, the Union cannot be a haven of peace in a seaof anguish. Hence the importance of planning for futureenlargements. Hence, also, the need to provide ourselves witha genuine common foreign and security policy. The EuropeanUnion is itself emerging from a difficult period. I am awarethat a great many of our citizens are sceptical of a Europe inwhich they do not always recognize their role. The future ofour Community can no longer be the exclusive province of aclique. The people of Europe are demanding to be heard, and tobe allowed to participate in a process which has become centralto their lives — and they are right. If we do not succeed inmeeting their expectations, the European project will fail. AndEurope's citizens want unequivocal answers to their questions.

What is the Union doing to ensure that our economy is strongand that the unemployed can find jobs? What is the Uniondoing to promote social solidarity and to improve the quality oflife? What is the Union doing to make Europe's voice heardthroughout the world? What is the Union doing to ensure thatits institutions are close to its citizens, democratic, efficient andproperly managed? The answers to these questions sum up theprogramme which I shall be presenting to the House today.

We shall put this programme into effect together. Beforeoutlining its main points, I wish to tell the House that in theinterests of efficiency, I shall be proposing to my colleaguesthat, in collaboration with Parliament and the Council, weshould revise without delay the 1990 code of conduct. It seemsto me only logical to bring it into line with the MaastrichtTreaty. In this context, amongst other things, the questions ofthe withdrawal of a proposal following rejection by a majorityin Parliament and the treatment of amendments in secondreading will have to be examined. And it is quite clear, I think,that in addressing these issues, the position of the EuropeanParliament must be given the great political importance itdeserves.

(Applause)

What I have just said shows that the Commission and each ofits members firmly intend to cooperate closely with Parlia-ment. That is what clearly emerged from the discussions I hadyesterday with my colleagues. That will be the policy of theCommission. I hope that in this way, the misunderstandingswhich have arisen over the last few days will be cleared uponce and for all.

(Mixed reactions)

That will depend on you, ladies and gentlemen!

(Laughter)

My first priority will be to promote a strong economy in whichjobs are created. The White Paper approved by the Heads ofState or Government recommends a comprehensive approach

to promoting competitiveness and growth. This is important,since Europe has no lack of assets, but needs a strategy forexploiting those assets as effectively as possible. In the nextfive years, our competitiveness must be markedly improved.Nevertheless, there is no point in having a strong economyunless it benefits everyone. The Union must be characterizedby solidarity. This is a moral imperative — and much more. Ibelieve that solidarity is itself a factor of economic impetus andgrowth. That is the message that I wish to convey to the Housetoday. A strong economy: and the internal market is central toour efforts to achieve growth and prosperity. Enormousprogress has been made over the last few years, but it is notenough. I shall set myself four essential goals: adding to therules; simplifying them: ensuring that they are implemented;and guaranteeing fair competition.

Firstly, we shall be continuing legislative action in key areassuch as energy and telecommunications. However, liberaliza-tion must go hand in hand with respect for the principle ofuniversal service, so that all our citizens can benefit.

Secondly, we shall be simplifying the rules at both national andregional level. The purpose of creating the internal market is tomake life easier for economic operators and consumers, tobring about the abolition of customs formalities, to cut thenumber of rules and to get rid of the millions of forms required.That is far from unimportant. Too often, however, unnecessarydifficulties are imposed on undertakings — especially smalland medium-sized undertakings — as a result of our comprom-ises. It is precisely small and medium-sized undertakingswhich create most jobs — and they have not ceased to do so.There are some 17 million small and medium-sized undertak-ings in the European Union. Just imagine if each of them wereto create one extra job!

Thirdly, we shall be ensuring that the rules are implementedcorrectly and in a unified way throughout the Union. Thedelays in transposing directives into national law — forexample as regards the insurance sector, public procurementand the environment — are to be deplored. The Commissionwill assume its responsibilities here. If necessary, it will ask theCourt of Justice, in accordance with Article 171 of the Treaty,to impose financial penalties on Member States which fail torespect a ruling. Furthermore, the implementation of Commun-ity law must be accompanied by the establishment of compar-able systems of penalties throughout the Member States. Thisis, and will remain, an area of competence of the MemberStates' governments; however, I wonder if the idea of insertingpenalty clauses into Community directives is not worthy ofconsideration.

Fourthly, we shall be safeguarding competition. The EuropeanUnion needs a referee to ensure what the British call a levelplaying field. The Commission will be rigorous in assuming itsresponsibilities in this context, whether in terms of abuse of adominant position, illegal agreements, or state aids. And Ishould like to say a word about mergers. This is another area inwhich we must be rigorous. But that does not mean that ourbusinesses should all remain small units — particularly in viewof the powerful competition from third countries and the globalnature of certain markets.

To ensure that it is fully effective, the completion of theinternal market must be accompanied by the creation ofmodern and efficient infrastructure in the areas of transport,energy and the environment.

With regard to transport, the European Council decided, at theEssen Summit, to launch 14 major projects before the end of1996. A further ten major projects in the energy sector will

complete this initiative. The first step in carrying out theseprojects is to mobilize the necessary funds, whether public orprivate. Administrative and legal barriers must also be elimi-nated. The Commission will address this task with enthusiasmand will draw up, as soon as possible, guidelines for infrastruc-ture networks in the environmental sector. A dynamic researchand development policy will be one of the keys to success. TheUnion will spend more than ECU 12 billion under the fourthframework programme, and I anticipate exciting developmentsin innovative areas such as the introduction of 'green' cars,reducing health costs, improving energy efficiency, and thecampaign against fraud. Over the next few years, I wish us tostep up our efforts to concentrate resources, enhance the linksbetween research and industry, facilitate the access of smalland medium-sized undertakings to our programmes, andfinally apply the principle of the mutual compatibility ofnational policies and Community policy, as provided for in theTreaty on European Union.

A dynamic economy is not possible without an effectivesystem of education and training. The campaign for jobsbegins with the improvement of vocational training for youngpeople and the development of continuous education. And Imust stress the importance of the role of businesses in thiscontext. The Maastricht Treaty provides us with new instru-ments in the areas of education and training. Thanks to thesenew instruments, the SOCRATES and LEONARDO pro-grammes will be launched in 1995. We must ensure that theiroperation is as open and effective as possible.

Education and training will benefit directly from the growth ofthe information society — a genuine technological revolution.The potential of this development is vast: the emergence ofmarkets which are calculated in billions of ecus; a prodigiousincrease in competitiveness; the creation of valuable new jobs;and enormous progress in the areas of medicine and education.Europe must not miss the boat and, for this reason, theCommission will be organizing a ministerial conference onthis subject in February, in the context of the G7.

The process under way is irreversible and universal. Ratherthan undergoing it, we must guide it: we should implement theaction plan proposed by the Commission without delay. But Iwish to go further. I wish the European Union to be at theforefront — with European technologies, products and ser-vices. Technological progress must contribute to cultural andlinguistic diversity in Europe. We must therefore also developthe substance of our strategy, and I should like us to be drivinga European vehicle on the information superhighway.

(Applause)

Nevertheless, we must be careful to ensure that access tonetworks and services is not restricted to the most privilegedsectors of society. If we fail to do so, knowledge will become adivisive force. On the contrary, it must be a unifying force —and I am confident that the European Parliament will assist theCommission in its efforts in this respect.

If we wish to have a strong economy, we must also have astrong single currency which is not at the mercy of internalexchange rate fluctuations. In this way, we shall be able todevelop the full potential of the internal market and encourageinvestment. The introduction of a single currency will, there-fore, bring considerable benefits to citizens in the course oftheir daily lives, and it should be borne in mind that Europeneeds an international monetary status to match its economicand social importance. We must not, therefore, deviate fromthe road to economic and monetary union mapped out in theMaastricht Treaty. Not so very long ago, the EMU project

appeared doomed — swept aside by currency speculation.Since then, however, it has begun to revive. Nevertheless, wemust remain vigilant.

A monetary project can only be realized if it is based oncredible action: that is why the convergence criteria were laiddown in the Maastricht Treaty. And the Commission will insiston the strict application of those criteria. The Member States,in their turn, must assume their responsibilities, and not relaxtheir efforts on the pretext that the economic conditions haveimproved. This, moreover, is one of the principles of goodmanagement. Why should we forgo the interest rate reductionthat a policy of reducing public deficits will bring? Similarly, atimetable is set out in the Maastricht Treaty. This timetablemust be respected and, to this end, the Commission will drawup a list of the necessary preparatory measures, to complementthose carried out by the European Monetary Institute. It willalso draw up a green paper on the conditions necessary formoving to a single currency. I remain optimistic: EMU will beachieved, I am certain of it. And it will change the life of ourpeoples.

(Loud applause)

Competitiveness and growth, Mr President, ladies and gentle-men, are undoubtedly essential. Nevertheless, I do not wish tosee the type of growth which leaves behind a section of thepopulation, which increases the disparities between regions.On the contrary, I wish to see the type of growth which isunderpinned by solidarity — social solidarity, regional solidar-ity, and solidarity with future generations: for reasons offairness, justice, morality — of course — but also, I wouldstress, for sound economic reasons.

Let us look at social solidarity first. Growth is a necessaryprecondition for the creation of employment, but it is notenough. A genuine employment policy must be put in placewithout delay, and I am encouraged by the priority given toemployment by the European Council at the Essen Summit.The five recommendations which were adopted all point in theright direction: stepping up training; reducing indirect wagecosts; improving the efficiency of the labour market; introduc-ing specific measures for young people, women and thelong-term unemployed; promoting employment in growthindustries. This is, indeed, the route which we must follow.The recommendations are addressed to the governments of theMember States: it is their responsibility to draw up multiannualprogrammes. The Commission will monitor the employmentsituation with the help of the ECOFIN and Social AffairsCouncils. And why should multilateral monitoring of employ-ment systems not be introduced? I am aware of the importancethat Parliament attaches to combating unemployment. TheCommission wishes you to be fully involved in this campaign,which is essential to the future of our society. The holding of awide-ranging public debate on this issue in the EuropeanParliament, before the end of the year, would be welcome.

The public authorities have a role to play, but they cannot doeverything. The two sides of industry must also be involved.As a former Prime Minister of my country, I have had what Ibelieve was extremely positive personal experience in thisarea. Employment is die highest priority of all. It would be aprofound mistake, however, to believe that we can win thisbattle by dismantling our social model. As President of theCommission, I shall never endorse such an approach.

(Applause)

Naturally, ladies and gentlemen, reconciling the desire forhigher levels of social protection with current economic

realities will require thoroughgoing reforms. That is the onlyway to ensure the preservation of the European social model.As for the Commission, it will shortly be presenting actionprogrammes designed to implement the White Paper onEuropean social policy. As provided for in the MaastrichtTreaty, it will play an active role in the development of thedialogue between the two sides of industry and the pursuit ofincreased social convergence between the Member States.

I regret the fact that at the Maastricht Summit, we were unableto move forward together. And I hope that in 1996, the unity ofthe 15 Member States will be restored, and that together weshall take a further step towards the creation of a social Europe.

(Applause)

As well as preserving the acquis communautaire, we mustachieve a degree of social cohesion which reflects the evolu-tion of technologies and lifestyles. Particular attention will bepaid to fostering equality of the sexes: this is a democraticimperative. The European Parliament is absolutely right in thisrespect. I fully understood the message that you gave us duringthe hearings, and I am responding to it. Firstly, I would pointout that because this is an extremely important issue, we haveset up a special group of Commissioners to deal with it. Havinglistened to the European Parliament's observations, we recog-nize that promoting the equality of the sexes must be a guidingprinciple in all the Commission's action. And this does notapply to the employment field alone. With the agreement of mycolleagues, it will be an open group which I personally willchair.

(Applause)

The challenge of combating poverty and social exclusion isequally great. There is an increasing number of people in theEuropean Union who are poor, badly housed and sociallyexcluded. That is quite unacceptable! I am not calling for newpowers for the Commission in this field, but combating socialexclusion is a duty which far outweighs any squabblingbetween institutions. I am ready to explore any possibilities, ofwhatever kind, in order to find solutions.

I will never grow tired of repeating, Mr President, that theEuropean project is a global project. Promoting regionalsolidarity is an integral part of it. Here too, there is a duty toensure fairness alongside the potential economic benefits.Fortunately, the route has largely been mapped out in thisregard, by virtue of the amendments to the Maastricht Treatyand the doubling of the Structural Funds agreed at theEdinburgh Summit, with a view to increasing economic andsocial cohesion. The Commission, with the help of theEuropean Parliament and the Committee of the Regions, willpay particular attention to ensuring the effective working of thepartnership between the Commission, the Member States andthe regions, to carrying out an objective analysis of the impactof the funds on the ground, and to encouraging local develop-ment. As provided for in the Treaty on European Union, weshall draw up, by 1996, a detailed report on the progress made.And we shall take advantage of this measure to give freshimpetus to European Union action in this respect.

I have just referred to social and regional solidarity. However,there is another type of solidarity which, I believe, is evenbroader in its scope: solidarity with future generations. Imentioned this earlier when discussing education, the reduc-tion of public deficits, and the large-scale networks. I shall newrefer to it again, in the context of promoting sustainabledevelopment — development whereby present needs are metwithout jeopardizing the ability of future generations to meet

their own needs. This will also lead me to talk about the qualityof our life in a broader sense. We must succeed in making thetransition to an economy which incorporates the environmen-tal dimension. We realize, today, that economic performanceitself depends on the optimum use of our natural resources. Bybeing at the forefront of the campaign in favour of theenvironment, we shall, in fact, create new jobs. With this inmind, I would identify three areas for action: firstly, ensuringthat the existing rules are applied — our Community is boundby the rule of law, and the Commission is guardian of theTreaties; secondly, integrating environmental considerationsinto all our policies; and thirdly, as proposed by the Commis-sion, including an environmental audit in the accounts of theMember States and the Union.

For more than 70% of the Union's population, quality of lifemeans quality of urban life. The alarming increase in theproblems of social exclusion, crime and pollution in many ofour cities should make us stop and think. While respecting theprinciple of subsidiarity, we must formulate a commonapproach both to the problems facing us and the means oftackling them — the existing means, and the means to bedeveloped at local, regional and national level, as well as atCommunity level. The European Parliament has emphasizedthis in its resolutions.

The regeneration of the countryside and country towns isanother priority objective in terms of improving the quality oflife. They must be protected as storehouses of environmentalquality, while the balance of all aspects of the rural environ-ment — economic, social and cultural — must be restored. Inthis context, the need for a revitalized common agriculturalpolicy is clear. Implementation of the 1992 reforms is goingwell, and we can view the future of the CAP and the ruralenvironment with optimism.

Quality of life is inseparable from freedom. Too often, ourcitizens have the feeling that the internal market was conceivedexclusively for businesses. They do not understand whyidentity checks are still made at the Union's internal borders.Queues at immigration controls at airports are at odds with myown idea of the internal market. I am thinking here of theprovisions of the Maastricht Treaty and Article 7a. And thenthere is the endless red tape which sometimes turns the processof moving from one Member State to another into nothingshort of an obstacle course. I never cease to be amazed when Ihear that something as simple as a driving licence is not alwaysautomatically recognized throughout the Union, without addi-tional formalities. I am calling for a little common sense. I amcalling for the principle of mutual recognition to be morewidely applied. I believe that our governments should putthemselves in the place of their citizens more often. Mistrustbetween governments, between legislators, between supervi-sory bodies leads to a rush to secure safeguard clauses,derogations, opt-outs, which mount up and make life impossi-ble for our citizens.

Everything that I have just mentioned has a bearing onconsumers. The outgoing Commission has just published aconsumers' guide. The new Commission will go further. In thecoming months, it will publish a complete guide to consumers'rights in the internal market. This guide will identify, inlanguage which is easy to understand, not only the positivecontributions of the internal market, but also its shortcomingsand the measures which have been taken, or will be taken, torectify them.

Mr President, the abolition of the Union's internal bordersmust be counterbalanced by increased cooperation in the areas

of home affairs and justice. The people of Europe wish to beable to move about freely, but they also wish their leaders toguarantee their security, and to combat crime, drug-traffickingand illegal immigration effectively. In view of the mixedresults of cooperation under the third pillar, I am bound to askmyself whether the Member States lack the will to act togetherin this area, and whether the instruments at our disposal areappropriate.

(Applause)

The new Commission will use the powers which it is grantedby the Maastricht Treaty to ensure that the potential of the thirdpillar is fully exploited. Nevertheless, we believe that thecurrent framework is inadequate. The aim of our contributionto the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference will be to bringabout a decisive improvement in the process of decision-making in this area, using the Community system as a model.

(Applause)

And in an area of such importance to our citizens, the EuropeanParliament must have its say.

(Applause)

The European Union has particular obligations towards itscitizens, but in a more general sense, it must provide a model ofrespect for human rights. I view the resurgence of racism andxenophobia in our countries with great alarm, and I share yourconcern in this respect. The Commission, as a whole, will befully involved in implementing the joint strategy outlined at theEssen Summit. The fight against this scourge will be animportant element of policy in the fields of education, socialaffairs and culture — to mention only those areas.

Mr President, the European Union is the foremost economicand commercial power in the world. Even more so than in thepast, it must be a strong partner which is respected in theinternational arena, so that it can both defend its legitimateinterests and be a force for the promotion of justice throughoutthe world. Europe must speak with one voice. It is interestingto observe, moreover, that this is what the rest of the worldexpects of us, and I sometimes have the feeling that Europe ismore of a reality to third countries than it is to the MemberStates themselves.

To maintain its position in the international arena, the Unionmust, first of all, be consistent in its use of the Communityinstruments available to it — and, in particular, the instrumentsof the common commercial policy. The new Commission isdetermined to play its rightful role in this context — not out of adesire for power, but out of concern for efficiency. This iscrucial to promote the interests of the Union, the MemberStates, and their economic operators. The successful conclu-sion of the Uruguay Round and the ratification of the GATTagreements made clear the enormous weight that Europe canbring to bear on partners as powerful as the United States,when it decides to speak with a single voice. We must draw theappropriate conclusions from this! Sometimes, as was con-firmed by the recent judgment of the Court of Justice oncompetence in the area of trade, there is too much suspicionbetween the Union's institutions. And that undermines ourcapacity for action. We must restore an atmosphere of trust.The Commission will assume its responsibilities when itnegotiates on behalf of the Union. And I give you my personalassurance that it will do so with total openness towards theCouncil and the European Parliament.

The European Union is, and will remain, an open partner. Thatis its overriding principle. The Commission will endeavour to

ensure that our partners play by the same rules, and open uptheir markets by dismantling the barriers that still prevent usfrom exercising the rights which the World Trade Organizationrecognizes us to have.

European businesses acquit themselves best in countries withopen markets. Similarly, the Commission will not hesitate touse all appropriate commercial means to prevent third coun-tries from pillaging our intellectual property or engaging in thepractice of dumping.

In this context, I have to say that the need to balance economicand social considerations does not apply to our region alone. Itis not a question of protectionism — an approach which I reject.Nevertheless, if we wish to have a world system which iseconomically and commercially balanced, economic consider-ations must go hand in hand with social considerations. TheUN summit on social questions — to be held in Copenhagen inMarch — will give the European Union the opportunity tobroadcast this message throughout the world.

Environmental problems also need to be addressed on a globalscale. Climate change, biodiversity and the reduction ofpolluting emissions are all global issues. In this area too, theEuropean Union must be at the forefront of progress. However,the process of cooperating on these issues is becoming boggeddown. A timetable has been established: a meeting of the G7devoted to the environment in April, and the forthcomingdiscussions on this subject in the World Trade Organization. Ihope that the Union will take advantage of these opportunitiesto give a boost to this process.

The European Union must continue to play its rightful leadingrole in the fields of development cooperation and humanitarianaid. It must have a presence on the ground, and this will beprovided by the Commission. It will be assisted in this respectby the new chapter on Community policy in this area which iscontained in the Maastricht Treaty.

Mr President, no one will dispute the fact that the EuropeanUnion is an economic giant. Nevertheless, it does not play apolitical role commensurate with its economic position. Thatexplains the attempt at Maastricht to lay the foundations for amore ambitious approach in this respect by developing acommon foreign and security policy. This has not yet producedthe results which had been hoped for. One of the majorproblems lies in our inability to develop a coherent approachwhich encompasses all the political and economic aspects ofthis field. The CFSP is so far little more than the continuationof the previous framework of political cooperation, with amore impressive title. The division of policy areas into pillarscan only partly explain these problems: they are above all inour heads. We must do better! We must concentrate on oneissue, which has been the same since the very foundation of theEuropean Community: what are our common interests? Canwe pool our efforts to achieve together something which isgreater than what any of us could achieve acting alone? TheMember States not only have common interests but, moreoften than not, common reactions. For decades now, we havebeen assembling a whole range of foreign policy instrumentswhich we do not hesitate to use, whether it is the LomeConvention or the various trade, partnership and cooperationagreements which we have concluded, or are in the process ofnegotiating, with a large number of countries.

What are we lacking, therefore, in order to have a genuinecommon toreign and secuiiiy policy? Tiic auawci it> a compre-hensive and coherent vision. In the first place, the developmentof a common foreign policy will require a joint effort ofsynthesis and planning. The Commission will play a part in

this effort, not in an attempt to supersede the Member States,but to help unify our policies and provide them with a strategicdimension which is currently lacking.

The Commission must begin by setting a good example. I havereorganized the structure of the external relations portfolios byadopting a geographical approach: a Commissioner who isresponsible for relations with a given part of the world will beresponsible for all aspects of those relations. I wish to make itclear that this reorganization does not call into question, in anyway, the horizontal approach with regard to the multilateralaspects of the common commercial policy, the CFSP or — andI would stress this because there have been misunderstandingsin this respect — development cooperation.

Furthermore, I wish to state that the new Commission hasdecided to step up coordination considerably in the area ofexternal relations. With this end in view, I shall myself bechairing a group of Commissioners which is to meet regularly.In this context, I shall personally take charge of human rightspolicy, which I consider to be a key element of externalrelations. And I would add that if the European Union wishesto remain credible in this respect, its own human rights recordmust be absolutely impeccable.

(Applause)

Clearly, we must apply the common foreign policy to allregions of the world. But let us look first at our immediateneighbours.

As far as the countries of Central and Eastern Europe areconcerned, the route has already been mapped out: it is theroute which — as we decided in Copenhagen in 1993, and havesince confirmed — will eventually lead us to welcome them tothe European Union. The Commission will therefore makevigorous efforts to implement all aspects of the pre-accessionstrategy adopted at the Essen Summit. The first priority will beto draw up, without delay, the planned white paper on theintegration of these countries into the internal market. Therewill also be a need to examine carefully the implications of theaccession of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe forcommon policies such as the CAP and the Structural Funds.Before the end of 1995, the Commission will present a whitepaper which deals specifically with such agricultural ques-tions.

The European Council emphasized the need for us to balanceour relations with the East and the South. We cannot remainindifferent to the situation on the southern shores of theMediterranean. We must develop an ambitious policy ofrapprochement with the countries of that part of the world,with one clear objective: restoring prosperity and trade to theMediterranean region. This will not be easy. Alongside thebilateral negotiations which we are currently conducting, wemust strengthen our overall approach. The Euro-Mediterra-nean conference, which is to be organized by the Spanishpresidency, will give us the opportunity to do so. With regardto Malta and Cyprus, whose accession to the Union willenhance its Mediterranean element, the Commission will drawup the report which the Council has asked it to submit in 1995.The development of relations with Turkey, which is animportant partner of the European Union, will be the subject ofcareful examination and exhaustive analysis. As regards theMiddle East, a region in which we already have extensivecommitments, the European Union clearly has a vital interestin actively promoting the peace piuccss there.

On the subject of our immediate neighbours, I cannot fail tomention the Union's relations with Russia and the other

members of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Thesecountries are going through a difficult period which, for some,is being accompanied by serious crises, such as that takingplace in Chechnya. The European Union must do everythingpossible to assist them in their efforts to establish democracyand a market economy. It is in our interest to have constructivediscussion partners who are ready to cooperate. This is anotherof the important policy areas which requires a coordinatedapproach.

In worldwide terms, the Union's close relations with itspartners in the OECD continue to be of great importance, andin particular our links across the Atlantic. I sometimes heargloomy reports of the United States' growing disinterest inEurope. I wish to tell the House, quite frankly, that I do notbelieve this to be the case. We are extremely close partners,and will remain so. Just look at the scale of trade between thetwo sides of the Atlantic — trade which, I would stress, is notonly massive but reasonably well balanced. Just think of ourshared security and defence interests. No, I am not pessimisticabout our relations, but level-headed and realistic. Europe mustmaintain its identity vis-a-vis the United States, and I person-ally am in favour of concluding a genuine transatlantic treaty tomake this easier for both parties.

(Applause)

Rather belatedly, our awareness of the importance of Asia isgrowing. The whole world is watching this booming continentclosely. Europe cannot, and will not, fail to be a presence inAsia. By the same token, the countries of that part of the worldmust resolve genuinely to open up their markets. I am in favourof the idea of organizing a summit meeting of Asian andEuropean leaders.

Another continent which is joining the ranks of the world'sbooming regions, and one to which we are joined by deepcultural ties, is Latin America. A number of regional groupingsare being formed in this area of the world, no doubt influencedby the European model. And I am confident that such adevelopment will open the way to the conclusion of interre-gional agreements, for example between the European Unionand MERCOSUR.

The conclusion of the Lome Convention was a pioneeringachievement of the European Community. Africa, which is theprincipal beneficiary, continues to struggle against enormousdifficulties. The Union will not turn its back on this continent.It will remain in the vanguard of efforts to help it. The recenttransition to democracy in South Africa provides an element ofhope in this tragic part of the world. I hope that it will be acrucial factor in the development of the entire region. Now thatwisdom — as personified by President Mandela, one of thetruly great statesmen of the century — has prevailed in SouthAfrica, the European Union must give its full backing to thatgreat country.

The challenges facing the European Union, Mr President,ladies and gentlemen, are vast, and equal to those which havealready been surmounted in the process of European integra-tion. The Union has just welcomed to its midst three newmembers. I am sorry that it was not four. A number of othercountries are waiting at the door. They are drawn to theEuropean Union and its message of peace, prosperity anddemocracy. We have a moral and political duty to welcomeamong us all those European countries which were previouslyprevented from joining us by the yoke of Communism. At thesame time, however, we have a duty to preserve the Union'sassets, to ensure that the acquis communautaire is not under-mined.

If the price of enlargement were to be movement backwards onthe road to integration, everyone would be the loser; theapplicant countries wish to join because the Union has highambitions. On the contrary, there is a need to make a newqualitative leap forward, similar to those that were made at thetime of previous enlargements. To this end, institutionalreform will be essential. For the moment, however, let us takeadvantage of the accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden toenhance the efficiency and democratic nature of our institu-tions and their functioning.

With a view to achieving this goal, I would pick out twocourses of action. The first consists of making a constant effortto focus on the essentials, so as to ensure that — in accordancewith the subsidiarity principle, laid down in Article 3b of theTreaty on European Union — we deal at Community level onlywith those things which cannot be achieved at national level. Inthis context, it should be said quite clearly that the worst enemyof subsidiarity is lack of confidence between the MemberStates. I sometimes have the feeling that, for some MemberStates, subsidiarity means: 'go and supervise all my neigh-bour's affairs, but leave me alone'.

(Applause)

And the principle of subsidiarity has another enemy: the badfaith of those who regard it purely as a means of blockingintegration, who invoke it in order to bring policy back undernational control, but who fail to apply it when it comes totaking action at Union level. My idea of subsidiarity isdifferent: let us stop harmonizing everything down to the lastbutton, but let us step up cooperation in areas which warrant it.Let us take less action in order to take more effective action.That should be the watchword of us all.

At this point, I should like to mention another aspect ofsubsidiarity: the dividing line between the individual and thepublic authorities. Only when giving powers to the publicauthorities is a means of helping individuals to realize their fullpotential can it be justified. I should like the Communityinstitutions to be particularly vigilant in this respect.

The second course of action concerns management. Let us befrank: this is an area in which I believe the Commission mustmake a special effort. Certainly, 80% of Community expendi-ture is implemented by the governments of the Member States.But this does not relieve us from meeting our responsibilities inrespect of the budget. The European Parliament, as well as theCourt of Auditors, is constantly reminding the Commission ofthis fact. My colleagues and I are determined to improve theCommission's budgetary and administrative culture. And Iwish to stress here the importance of our constructive relationswith the Court of Auditors and this House. When the criticismis justified, we shall take corrective action.

An issue which I know is of concern to a great many Europeancitizens, and to this Parliament in particular, is that of fraudagainst the Union's financial interests. Let us make the fightagainst fraud one of our joint priorities at all levels. Everyonemust play their part in this respect: firstly, in terms oflegislation, the Union's institutions must step up their work onthe Commission's proposals of last June; secondly, in terms ofmanagement and control, the institutions and the MemberStates must continually bear in mind the fact that the money wespend belongs to Europe's taxpayers; and, finally, the MemberStates must take the appropriate punitive action.

Undoubtedly, there is a need to improve the functioning of theUnion, to exploit more fully the potential of the current Treaty.Nevertheless, with the prospect of an enlarged Union of more

than 20 members, that will not suffice. At the Corfu Summit,the European Council established a clear connection betweenenlargement and the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference.While it is too early to reveal the Commission's stance in thiscontext, I should like to submit to the House a number ofpreliminary considerations.

The first concerns our methods. It will be essential to ensurethat a genuine public debate takes place within the Union, andwithin each Member State — firstly, and most importantly, byproviding for the direct participation of the European Parlia-ment in the negotiations. It is excellent, in this regard, that MrsGuigou and Mr Brok will be members of the high-level group.And I would add here that, in my view, the assent of theEuropean Parliament should be required for any modificationof the Treaty.

(Applause)

Obviously, the public debate will include the national parlia-ments. At the time of the negotiation of the Maastricht Treaty,this House took the initiative of organizing joint sittings withthe representatives of national parliaments. These proved to beextremely useful. Would it not be possible, between now andJune 1995, for the President of the European Parliament andthe leaders of national parliaments to get together and organizea similar debate on the major issues concerned in the streng-thening of our institutions? Clearly, this is an idea whose meritI shall leave it to the House to judge.

Basically, reforms must be undertaken, whether the Uniondecides on a new enlargement or not. This is provided for inthe Maastricht Treaty. It is clear, however, that any suchenlargement would itself necessitate reforms, since it wouldprevent the current system — even if improved — fromcontinuing to operate effectively.

It is in this dual context that the Intergovernmental Conferencewill be required to examine firstly the Union's main fields ofaction and, secondly, its institutional framework. I do notbelieve that action under the first pillar as such should bemodified to any significant degree. Henceforth, it should bemore a matter of improving the quality of our action than ofcontinuing to call for increased powers and responsibilities.Nevertheless, as provided for in the Maastricht Treaty, adecision will have to be taken on the future of such fields asenergy, tourism and civil protection. The area of social policywill undoubtedly also have to be re-examined.

I wish to make one thing quite clear: the Commission willnever endorse, on the pretext of enlargement, a retreat inrespect of the acquis communautaire.

(Applause)

The applicant countries must fully accept the acquis commu-nautaire — with the proviso mat reasonable periods oftransition are allowed for. Starting forthwith, we shall assistthem in fulfilling this condition.

I have already stressed the enormous importance that I attachto the development of a genuine and coherent common foreignpolicy. Likewise, the Maastricht Treaty commits the MemberStates to moving towards the establishment of a commonsecurity policy and, in the long term, a common defence force.Undoubtedly, this will be one of the key issues at theIntergovernmental Conference. How, in practical terms, do welink the Western European Union and liie European Union?What relationship should this regional grouping have withNATO? What kind of negotiations with our partners will thisaction make necessary? How will the WEU be composed? All

these questions, and many others, will have to be carefullyconsidered. In the interests of the whole continent, the systemthat we build must represent an element of stability and peacewithin a renewed partnership with the world's major powers.

As far as the third pillar is concerned, I believe that its methodsof operation must be subjected to further detailed examination.The fact that the countries of Central and Eastern Europe arealso keen to cooperate in the areas of justice and home affairsmakes such an examination all the more necessary.

The European Union's actions require an effective institutionalframework. And, in this respect, the prospect of furtherenlargements can only increase the urgency of the need forimprovements — improvements which, if they were desirablewhen the Union had 12 Members, are all the more so now thatit has 15.

As far as institutional issues are concerned, I would identifythree which, in one way or another, are faced by all theinstitutions: firstly, the question of composition; secondly, thequestion of working methods, including the issue of thepresidency; and thirdly, the question of the decision-makingmechanisms. In all these areas, the Commission will besubmitting proposals designed to improve the functioning ofthe various institutions, while seeking to maintain the necess-ary balance. These questions deserve to be considered thor-oughly. The same is true of other institutional issues, withregard to which I should like to make three obvious commentsof a preliminary kind.

Firstly, with each new enlargement, it becomes increasinglynecessary for the Union to concentrate its action on theessentials.

Secondly, with each new enlargement, the growing distancebetween individual citizens and the centre increases the need tostrengthen the Union's democratic legitimacy, and thereforethe role of the European Parliament. Further progress will haveto be made, whether in terms of codecision, budgetary powersor the appointment of the Commission. Why, for example,should the European Parliament not be allowed to elect mysuccessor from a list put forward by the Heads of State orGovernment?

(Applause)

Thirdly, with each new enlargement, the pressure grows toadopt a multi-speed approach. Should we be evading thisdebate? I believe not, particularly as such an approach alreadyexists and has enabled the Union to move forward in the past.But let it be quite clear: there can be no question of exclusion,nor of a 'Europe a la carte'. No Member State can be arbitrarilyexcluded from the vanguard: those who wish, and are able, toaccept the additional obligations which this implies cannot beturned away. Similarly, the vanguard cannot be a closed shop:the slower Member States must be allowed to join it as soon asthey fulfil the conditions. And finally, the adoption of such anapproach must not, under any circumstances, be used as apretext for calling into question the acquis communautaire, orweakening the Community institutions.

In conclusion, Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I wish tosend the House a threefold message: a message of determina-tion, commitment and hope. As you will have gathered, theCommission over which I shall preside will be a determinedand open institution: determined to work for the common goodand to keep the European Union's institutions strong. And, inour determination, the European Parliament will be our ally.Today, I give a commitment to work with you in complete

openness, to report to you and to be accountable to you. Afterall — or rather, above all — that is what democracy is about!

I give a solemn commitment that reasserting our commonvalues and the great objectives which underlie the process ofEuropean integration will be made a daily task of the newCommission — above all, when the Intergovernmental Confer-ence begins its work. We must be more combative. We mustreject the attacks of those who wish to tackle tomorrow'sproblems with yesterday's solutions. We must have thecourage to combat those who claim to be European, but whoseideas for Europe are confined to calling into question theCommunity model.

I am an optimist by nature, Mr President, and with the help ofthe rest of the Commission, the European Parliament and thecitizens of the Union — including all those dedicated workersemployed in our institutions — I shall provide myself with themeans to match my optimism. On the eve of the thirdmillennium, Europe will be stronger, more united and closer toits citizens.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we are now reaching theend of the investiture procedure. Throughout this process, Ihave done my utmost to meet the wishes of this Parliament. Iinsisted that the Member States' governments should nominatemore women to the Commission. A quarter of the Commis-sioners-designate are women. Likewise, I insisted on thenomination of political figures, and that the new Commissionshould be a political body. I accepted, against the advice of mypredecessor, moreover, the principle of individual hearings, ascalled for in the Froment-Meurice report. I also insisted,however, that the principle of the collective responsibility ofthe Commission should not be undermined, and that noCommissioner-designate should be asked to give commit-ments that he or she would be unable to honour.

(Applause)

To facilitate the organization of the hearings, I honoured mycommitment to you, Mr President, to announce the composi-tion of the Commission, and the distribution of portfolios,before 1 November 1994.

And finally, I have done my utmost in this speech to respond asfully as possible to the criticisms expressed during thehearings, and to clear up any misunderstandings which mayhave arisen. I believe, therefore, that I and my colleagues havecooperated with the European Parliament in an honest andconstructive way. It is now up to you, Mr President, ladies andgentlemen, to give your own verdict.

(Loud applause)