H.E. Dr. Gints Apals:

Before answering each question, I remind the committee of an important consideration. As I have tried to explain, the responsibility of the Presidency is to ensure the smooth functioning of all council information. The efficiency of a Presidency cannot be measured by a number of decisions adopted. We are in a policy process both in terms of the trio work programme and harmonisation between the Presidency priorities, the trio work programme and work programmes of the European Commission and other institutions and partners. I cannot comment too much on positions of other member states concerning specific issues. The representatives of many member states are here and it would not be appropriate for me to comment on their national positions.

The Presidency intends to ensure smooth functioning of institutions and it also intends to remain perfectly neutral when it comes to all member states. We cannot use the position of the Presidency to promote our national interest or take sides. We should forge a compromise and, therefore, compromise on each and every issue is an ultimate objective. This will leave space for the incoming Presidency to continue from the point where our Presidency ends.

I will now go through the questions individually. There was a question about fiscal compact limits in light of the ongoing discussion concerning the European fund for strategic investment. I can outline the calendar for European debate of these issues. As we know, the proposals concerning the strategic investment fund will be discussed and submitted before the meeting of economic and financial affairs ministers. That will happen on 27 January. A status report will follow to the same Council formation in February. The Presidency intends to formulate a common approach by March. In the margins of the General Affairs Council in March and June, we will work towards a draft European Council decision. The collective undertaking of the EU is to have a political decision this year. This means that decisions should be taken at the latest in May in order that the fund can start functioning in June.

The problem, namely, the fiscal compact limits, will form part of the wider debate. I hope this issue will be successfully resolved according to the existing schedule.

Concerning the eastern partnership, this should be one of my favourite subjects because it is a high priority for my government, in view of our geographical location and historical experience. I referred to one major event which is the eastern partnership summit to be held on 20 to 21 May, in Riga. There will also be debates and discussions at ministerial level and the participation of civil society from all eastern partnership countries before and after the summit meeting. The objective of all these activities is to reconfirm the interest of the European Union in having a close partnership with eastern partnership countries, namely, the six countries participating in that project, which are Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Moldova.

In our view it would be right to keep that platform of multilateral co-operation for future relationships. These countries are not all the same in that they have varying degrees of ambition when it comes to relationships with the EU. Nevertheless, we think that keeping the platform is very important in order to have a more or less balanced progress through the geographical area to the east - while not exactly continuing bilateral co-operation with these countries - but also to ensure that the process develops in a more balanced manner in all six countries.

Concrete deliverables for the Riga summit would be, first, decisions and debate on visa liberalisation; second, an evaluation of the results concerning the implementation of the decisions; and stocktaking on the progress of association agreements with Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova. We could also start a debate on the role of the Russian Federation, how to conduct dialogue with the Russian Federation and how to change the image of the eastern partnership in the Russian-speaking media. There could also be a debate on strategic development of the initiative and on how the initiative should develop in the future. I will comment on that initiative in more detail if necessary and on the deliverables of the Riga summit.

On the question about enlargement, our priority is to keep the enlargement process alive. We know that pessimistic comments were voiced last year by many high level representatives of European institutions. Nevertheless, the Presidency is directly responsible for chairing all the Council meetings and also for steering the enlargement process. Therefore, in co-operation with the European Commission, we intend to continue the negotiation process in good faith. I cannot comment further on whether significant progress will be achieved because high level representatives have already stated it is probable that actual enlargement will not happen in the coming years.