kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
banning the promotion or propagation of homosexuality is likely to have a chilling effect on free speech and discussions as the fundamental rights agency has pointed out.
we will see but that is what he predicted.
indeed david cameron predicted that the first openly gay prime minister in the uk would be a tory.
it is talk discussion debate right of assembly that would be affected by the proposed lithuanian laws.
the situation in the uk has been transformed to the extent that the proprietors of a small guest house were today forced to pay compensation to a gay couple whom they refused to allow to stay in breach of the law.
since then the eu's charter of fundamental rights and i believe its articles twelve and twenty one have come into force further guaranteeing in law citizens' freedom from discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation at eu institutional level. as a spokesman for my party and group on human rights issues outside the union i can say categorically that the ecr upholds and endorses principles of equality tolerance and diversity everywhere.
undoubtedly lithuanian society remains by and large conservative and we should understand that.
every country that wants to become a member state of the eu must commit to that principle and be signatory to the echr not least with regard to sexual orientation.
equality is a hallmark of our progressive society in europe and i believe in fact that the legal safeguards and individual rights guaranteed by the eu acted as a kind of magnet to countries such as lithuania as they emerged from communist totalitarian domination. i would therefore urge the lithuanian authorities to reflect on the fact that the eu is committed to preventing the marginalisation vilification and persecution of minorities that was so commonplace throughout europe for the first half of the twentieth century.
the commission should indeed look at this proposed draft lithuanian piece of legislation and pronounce whether or not in its opinion this piece of legislation is compatible with eu law although as simon busuttil put it it is entirely possible that this bill will not become law as lithuania is a democracy and is only too well aware of all the issues we are going to raise in this debate tonight.
people are entitled to their own private views but at an institutional and legal level we cannot compromise on the principle that we are all equal.
however many europeans do hold traditional views with regard to homosexuality often based on religious conviction. just as we seek to uphold the law to protect lgbt rights so too should we seek to ensure that those who wish to express contrary non inflammatory views within the bounds of the law regarding free speech should be free to do so as well.
i salute the courage of the hundreds of gay people and their supporters who braved the hate campaign against them to march in the baltic pride parade in lithuania's capital vilnius in may of last year.
the political establishment in that country has dismally failed its people particularly the youth.
this is a poisonous slander designed to confuse and mislead.
madam president the proposed law to ban what is called the public promotion of gay relations in lithuania is another excuse to crush the rights of gay lesbian transgender and bisexual people in that state.
five in these circumstances using minorities including gay people as scapegoats is a standard cynical way to divert attention from the failures of the establishment.
it is reprehensible that young people in lithuania coping with their emerging sexuality which is a difficult enough time must now do so in a climate of intolerance and fear.
coming from ireland i can confirm tragically that threats to children come traditionally from within institutions where they are supposed to be safe within certain families and within certain areas of the catholic church.
so we should stand in solidarity with the right of all people in lithuania in russia throughout the european union and elsewhere to live in peace and in accordance with their own identities.
how cruelly ironic that a country which threw off the shackles of stalinist dictatorship only twenty years ago should now revert to aping one of the many crimes of that system the suppression of the right of people to live freely and in peace according to their own sexual identity.
just as in the hate campaign against gays in uganda the homophobic campaign in lithuania tries to insinuate that gay people pose a threat to children implying sexual abuse of children.
it is a slander that would have parents look in the wrong direction to protect their children.
the commission is continuing to look into this matter.
of marriage.
we recalled in that letter that freedom of peaceful assembly as provided for in the european convention on human rights and article twelve of the charter is one of the principles on which the union is founded.
in may two thousand and ten the commission wrote to the lithuanian government expressing worries about the last minute suspension of the baltic gay pride event.
two thousand and ten this amendment prescribes that advertising and audiovisual commercial communication must not contain manifestation or promotion of sexual orientation'.
how this is to be achieved was explained very clearly in the commission's communication on the strategy for effective implementation of the charter of fundamental rights adopted on nineteen october. two thousand and ten we will come back to this matter in the annual report on application of the charter which also covers progress on the application of article.
our green paper on recognition of civil status is designed for cross border situations such as the recognition of birth certificates and is not concerned with the recognition of same sex marriage.
if these provisions were to remain in the law we would see the same problems in terms of compliance with the audiovisual media services directive and possible violation of article twenty one of the eu charter of fundamental rights.
code was postponed and is now expected to take place in spring this year. this means that it is still under discussion.
today we are discussing the amendments which have been put to the lithuanian parliament but that should not distract us from the fact that homophobia exists in all member states.
i think it is very urgent and very necessary that we have such a strategy a strategy to fight prejudice ignorance discrimination and hatred and to strengthen the rights of lgbt people.
it has no place in the european union and i would like to hear what the commission intends to do about it.
i do not have much to say about the resolution but i think it is becoming increasingly clear that the european union needs to equip itself with stronger legal instruments for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
we have laid down the principles the shared values of five hundred million citizens in the european treaties but when it comes to putting them into practice we run into trouble.
therefore commissioner i would like to hear your views on our proposal for a european road map for lgbt rights. the european union has done a lot for gender equality in the past and indeed we have regular road maps for gender equality.
europe should fight against all forms of discrimination and that includes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
at the same time we have to respect the right of any democracy as long as it respects human rights and the non discrimination principle to discuss modify and adopt national laws without interfering in the debates of national parliaments without infringing the principle of subsidiarity and without acting or condemning a member state prematurely.
we do not like the idea of condemning a member state especially since in this particular case the proposed modifications have not even been voted on by the plenary of the lithuanian parliament and are still under review by the lithuanian authorities.
not only that but the proposed modifications have already been deemed to be in conflict with european law by the lithuanian authorities themselves who have declared that they will be taking action to remedy the situation and to respect the principle of non discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.
so this proposed legislation will probably not even make it onto the statute book of lithuania and therefore there is no need to condemn this member state.
to conclude i do hope nonetheless that tomorrow the epp will be able to support the joint resolution as long as it does not condemn any individual member state and as long as it is modified to make it more balanced.
they wanted money for themselves and they wanted power.
of course they already had a flag and they already had an anthem but they went about building a new state.
what they did whether they knew it or not was to recreate the very evil system that the people in eastern europe had lived under before.
but joy of joys the wall came down and we finished up with twenty seven nations and those people lived in democracy and five hundred million people lived in peace there is more.
they denied people a say and in the end those people had to resort to violence to get back their nation states and their democracies.
no they made life tougher and tougher they put tens of millions into poverty;
there was a big wall down the middle of it and the people in the east were very poor and they had no democracy and they lived under an evil system called communism that killed millions of its own people.
but still the new bosses would not listen to the people.
but they ignored the people.
mr president in generations to come children will be told a story.
but let me just make a comment. during this vote i have heard here some remarks and i want to state very clearly that those who compare totalitarian soviet union with the european union do not know what it was to live under dictatorship and they do not know what democracy is.
in the european union we have a european commission elected by you as the elected representatives of the citizens of europe and this is democracy.
i also want to thank the president of the council for his warm words.
we see there is strong support across the political spectrum;
this is an important moment for europe a real mandate for boldness.
we believe that now with the democratic legitimacy which was given to us by you by the designation of the democratic governments of all of our twenty seven member states we are proud and confident in working with full determination for the good of democracy in europe a europe which is
we expect more from a high representative than we have seen until now.
the basic assumption behind this new bold approach is the recognition that in fact in the multipolar world of tomorrow europe cannot play a significant role without being more effective and without further deepening its own integration in the near future.
we want a commission with a bolder more ambitious and more integrated economic and social approach a commission that is at the forefront of such a strategy a strategy that can force member states to do what they have to do.
we expect the new european commission to be the engine of the european union.
high representative ashton we ask you to use these new tools.
we expect that to achieve this the commission will use the right of initiative to its full potential.
mr president some member states believe the nomination of a commissioner is a useful opportunity to sort out a domestic problem or settle a political debt.
the european commission should bring together the most talented and effective political leaders from across europe people with experience and competence to help it address the enormous challenges we face.
after years of institutional wrangling europe needs to refocus its efforts on delivering results in areas where it can add value to the work of the member states and where our fellow citizens expect the nations of europe to cooperate.
it must support efforts to nurture fragile economic recovery and to generate growth and jobs and has to play a leading role in tackling energy security and climate change.
it must propose central reforms to the european budget and many of the key expenditure programmes.
in mr barroso we have the right leader to take the commission forward. in his political guidelines he outlines an ambitious agenda to focus on the issues that matter an agenda which in general we support.
every single member state should have backed his efforts by sending the strongest possible nominee as commissioner and in some cases he has been badly let down.
of course he must back every member of his team we would expect nothing less from a leader in his position and in organising his team although we question some portfolios he has probably done his best with what he has got.
but whilst some nominees are excellent and performed well in the hearings others are mediocre and made a poor impression.
some distanced themselves from his own political guidelines.
mr president if the vote is favourable we will of course engage constructively with every commissioner and we still hope to be positively surprised but please let us at least have an annual assessment by this parliament of the commission.
for these reasons the european conservatives and reformists will today abstain on this vote.
we are united in that position.
i am honoured to be one of the sponsors of the declaration and i urge colleagues to support this campaign so we can share best practice in the eu and across the globe.
we should be clear what we want to prevent and how policing the internet can work in practice.
eleven colleagues from different countries and parts of this parliament will soon be launching a written declaration highlighting the global dimension of the fight against on line child sexual abuse content emphasising the importance of sharing information and expertise internationally.
by sharing intelligence with the police the iwf has aided the rescue of twelve children in the past two years.
the internet watch foundation based in my region has an impressive record.
the european union by promoting dialogue must stand very firmly when addressing those issues.
house. however there was a very precise question on the recast directive that is the directive on equality in the labour market and on the pay
about affordable care services and about ensuring the fiscal treatment of second earners allows women to continue to work and does not prohibit them from continuing to work. the majority of these recommendations concern the provision of adequate and affordable care services;
a company which promotes equal pay will attract female talent.
that is why i would advise some of the members of this house to read what the commission has put on the table.
that is an efficient business model.
the commission is monitoring the implementation of these provisions and will report on the implementation of the recast directive early this
gap. this directive contains provisions on equal pay as well as provisions on sanctions.
guideline seven states work life balance policies with the provision of affordable care and innovation in work organisation should be geared to raising employment rates particularly among youth older workers and women in particular to retain highly skilled women in scientific and technical fields'. as you see we have included
so we have made the eu's founding principles a tangible reality in european national law.
we sometimes forget that gender equality is one of the fundamental rights on which the european union is based.
on the basis of that study we have launched a public consultation to gather views on the best ways to develop measures to fight female genital mutilation.
when we waste wisdom and when we refuse to break with inequality be it in africa or in europe.
please help because this cannot continue.
it has endorsed the european protection order in civil matters so women who are protected against violence in their member state can now take this protection with them when they go to another member state.
very many national laws were created on the basis of european directives at a time when nobody thought it would be necessary to have laws in the member states on equal treatment for men and women.
this is something we can and should be proud of gender equality is a european achievement.
the prevalence of negative gender stereotypes based on societal beliefs and attitudes restricts the opportunities for women in the social economic and political sphere. the gender pay gap is still sixteen while under representation of women in political and business decision making occupational segregation and the growing problem of women's poverty illustrate the severity of the problem in our society and demand more effort from us.
we should not be afraid of talking about highly sensitive issues such as sexist insults degrading images of women and pornography and their link to violence against women and the role of women in society.
one way to achieve this is to bring about an end to gender stereotypes.
the reports we have been voting on cover some important issues relating to women's rights. however as in many cases we find parliament crosses the red line into areas which are member state competencies. in addition the reports have a vision of what a woman should be and they come up with tools such as quotas to enforce this vision.
in the process they undermine the ability of women to achieve implying they need a helping hand up the ladder to succeed.
yes some women need support to give them confidence some need guidance in terms of mentoring but all need respect and belief in their ability to succeed in whichever path they take.
they were in the forefront demanding democracy social justice freedom and equality.
the eu's contribution is crucial for the setting up of a truly democratic political culture involving gender equality.
if the constitutional process is completed without gender equality being effectively safeguarded the tools we have at our disposal will not help.
this. the agenda is an important opportunity for all of us to depart from business as usual.
a strong effective united nations as well as a strong united european union acting together to advance our foreign policy objectives values and interests on the united nations stage are more essential than ever since its creation seventy years ago.
the challenges we face today are truly global in nature and effective world governance has never been so crucial.
we must preach peace development and security and we believe that as a global framework agreed by all the united nations member states the two thousand and thirteen agenda can help us to do
the time has come for the british people to vote to leave behind this nineteenth century answer to a twentieth century problem and reaffirm our identity as a genuinely influential global trading nation.
but that means working against poverty worldwide and if we don't spend at least.
there can be a lot of council talks there can be a lot of speeches all around but if we don't put money into it then it's not going to happen.
eu citizens need to know that every euro spent has an added value and delivers results.
we should actually be at fifty spending on climate change related issues.
there also we all signed and we all proclaimed and we all claimed to agree that we need to do something to remove the reasons for why people have to flee their homes.
the eu should rather support local groups and initiatives that promote european values directly and if governments don't comply with basic rule of law standards then the money going to those member states should be managed by the commission itself so that it will benefit the communities and municipalities but not some individuals indeed that are filling their pockets.
we are very much ready to discuss your proposals.
do we really mean what we say and do we really mean what we sign?
that is where the money should go to social policies youth programmes research and also farming that is good for people and the planet. and all this money needs to be spent well.
it's decided by who is doing what and when. and the budget of the eu our budget must show that there is a clear commitment to saving this planet.
what kind of future do we want to see for the european union?
too much is being diverted misused and even contributes right now to fraud and to corruption in member states.
because everyone wants to be on the photo at the paris climate change agreement everyone wanted to be on it when it was signed but whether we save the planet for ourselves and for future generations that's not decided by selfies.
that proposal the eu would finally have more own income independently of the whims of the member states and those revenue sources would be contributing to something good fairer taxes less plastic pollution and less climate change.
we very much agree with your ideas for that a common corporate tax base emission trading system benefiting the eu budget and a plastic tax.
and what is true for climate change is certainly also true for the development goals.
all this money has to come from somewhere and we are very happy that the commission is proposing to establish new forms of own resources.
zero seven of our gni on sustainable development following very clear criteria then we're failing the global community.
i think this is one of the biggest tasks that this budget has to do making sure that it helps the rule of law without taking citizens hostage for their governments' behaviour and without creating a rift between any geographical parts of europe.
so i am happy to see that more money will be put into climate related issues but if we're ending up at twenty five that's certainly a step in the right direction but it's a very small step.
who represents the companies and the citizens?
who wants an army at his call and to force one currency on all?
instead of cutting back accordingly the commission wishes to increase spending and is looking for a settlement of way over one trillion euros financed by taxpayers from the remaining member states and in effect that means a handful of major net contributor nations.
instead he has chosen la carte though his team says it is determined to offer a menu with prices and i saw a quote earlier this week of eur one hundred and fifty billion for a full eu border management system.
well mr president i don't and the british public doesn't.
it all puts one in mind of the cole porter song from high society who wants to be a millionaire?
so who wants to be a trillionaire and have flashy flunkies everywhere?
but the hard fact is that sixty five million people one in seven of the entire eu population is about to wave goodbye.
who wants to dish out all the orders and to take charge of everybody's borders?
this means that if we know that our future will be reshaped by the digital revolution and the energy transition we need to be bold on the transition towards aligning our budget but also on the way to finance this budget.
of course we need to cope with the challenges of migration defence and development;
we need to multiply erasmus;
we need to strengthen innovation and the way we proceed with research. but at the end of the day what really matters in order to keep unity among europeans is to have a strong commitment with cohesion and convergence and to overcome the divergences which have been part of our history in
and we are still not there.
in the commission proposal there are a lot of things where this parliament has already been clearly heard.
to me the message is obvious after brexit we need more europe not less europe.
we need strong commitment in the areas where we can be stronger together.
that's why the commission proposal on the next mff is a good starting point for real and i hope lively discussions also in the member states because now it's up to the member states to come up with answers to some of their own causes.
with growing challenges in defence security and migration and with ample evidence that investing in european infrastructure and digital economy pays off handsomely how on earth would you be able to finance the union with anything less than what the commission is today proposing?
when it comes to money this is the minimum.
there is also a substantial amount of infected pigmeat at one plant.