Documents received: see Minutes


Approval of the Minutes of the previous sitting
(FR) Mr President, I would like to comment on point 16 of the Minutes, which quite rightly reports my request for a debate to be held on the waiver of my parliamentary immunity, something which you rejected. This therefore contradicts what the President of the sitting Mrs Angelilli said earlier, when she claimed that I had been given the floor yesterday to talk about the waiver of my parliamentary immunity, which is not true. This Parliament has therefore deprived one of its Members of a vital right to protection, without allowing either the party himself or anyone who may have spoken in his defence to speak on the subject in plenary, either during a debate or during their explanations of vote or any other occasion. I simply wanted this to be acknowledged, so thank you for having done that.
I understand that your comment is intended for the Minutes. Thank you for this comment.


Decision on urgent procedure
Council Proposal on the conclusion of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania - C6-0334/2006 -
draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Fisheries. - (ES) Madam President, since the Chairman of the Committee on Fisheries, Mr Morillon, is not present, I simply wished to say on behalf of that committee that we are in favour of this urgent procedure. We believe that it is necessary to speed up the procedure, as the Commission has requested. The Committee on Fisheries is therefore in favour of this urgent procedure.
(Parliament adopted the urgent procedure)


5. Citizens' initiative (


2. Situation in Syria, Yemen and Bahrain in the context of the situation in the Arab world and North Africa (


11. Placing of plant protection products on the market (


1. Christian communities in the Middle East (debate)
The next item is the debate on seven motions for resolutions on Christian communities in the Middle East.
author. - (IT) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, religious freedom is an objective factor in recognising respect for human rights. The violence suffered by Christians around the world is both an affront and a challenge to human dignity.
I intended to table this draft resolution at the last plenary in October, but the coordinator of the political groups asked me to postpone the resolution until the November plenary, to give us time to prepare a more detailed text backed by a broader consensus. In the text that we will be voting on this afternoon, which is the result of a compromise between socialists, liberals, the Union for Europe of the Nations Group and the Independence and Democracy Group, the salient features of the initial draft resolution have remained.
We have also been able to insert concrete references to acts of violence and abuses committed this year not only in the Middle East, but in other parts of the world against Christian communities. These events mainly concern Iraq, Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, China and Vietnam, and in fact the intense coordination carried out in the last few days and the consequent unearthing of numerous episodes that have occurred outside the Middle East has led us to find a new, more fitting title, which is 'serious events which compromise Christian communities' existence and those of other religious communities'.
Obviously the text does not include all violence perpetrated against Christians, such as in Eritrea and North Korea. However, ladies and gentlemen, I would ask you to recognise the political message of this text, which is also aimed at those countries and incidents that have not been mentioned. From the outset, having to liaise with other groups has allowed me to clarify that this resolution in no way intends to rekindle conflict between civilisations. Europe has always been first in line when it comes to protecting minority rights and cannot continue to ignore the increasing harm being inflicted on so many Christians.
Today, ladies and gentlemen, our Parliament can express itself on an urgent and important subject, for the protection of life and religious freedom, not only of Christians, but of millions of people of all faiths. I would therefore ask...
(The President cut off the speaker)
author. - Madam President, I speak on behalf of the Socialist Group to give our total support to this joint motion for a resolution on religious persecution.
In one minute I can only touch on some elements of that resolution, and want to focus on the plight of the indigenous Christian community in Iraq, which at one time represented almost 10 % of the population. As someone who supports and is supported by the Save the Assyrians campaign, I have to say that this Parliament is wont to rest on compromising consensus, which sometimes results in a levelling and a loss of meaning.
That is true of this resolution. Recital K deplores the situation of Assyrian villages in Turkish border areas. Why? Because the Turkish Government is actually shelling Assyrian villages, claiming that they contain PKK militants, which seems to be an unlikely situation. In recital S it also refers to the situation in Syria, to where tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of refugees have fled from Jordan and Iraq, but the border is now being closed.
What is needed is help and assistance.
Madam President, may I begin by expressing my satisfaction and by thanking the other co-authors of the resolution dealing with such an important problem as the events surrounding Christian communities in certain Middle Eastern states, as well as on a world scale.
At the same time, as one of the signatories to this resolution, I would like to emphasise that a guarantee of religious freedom is the first step towards assuring fundamental human rights, and the instances of persecution of Christians that occur around the world are a basic example of violation of these rights.
Furthermore, while mindful of the fact that we are seeing a lack of any reaction on this matter from authorities, institutions and political movements around the world, I would like once again to stress the significance of the resolution under discussion for defence of the rights of Christians and to emphasise that the Union for Europe of the Nations Group fully supports it.
author. - (FR) Madam President, I dare not think what the expressions on the faces of my PPE fellow Members would be if they found out that a resolution on Muslim communities in Europe had been adopted by the Gulf States or by ASEAN. It would be felt as a nasty shock, a sign of aggression, an unacceptable intrusion by a religious authority in a non-EU country into relations between our Member States and religious minorities. Do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you is also a Christian precept.
Seriously, would such a resolution be perceived as a call for tolerance and intercultural and religious dialogue? Certainly not! The European Union, so proud of its values, would be well advised to demonstrate on these ultra-sensitive issues a modicum of discernment and respect for international conventions.
To tackle violations of the rights of people from religious minorities, to condemn the murder of Christians or restrictions on freedom to worship, we have a choice between two equally well-founded approaches. The first is to talk to a country, on the basis of its international commitments and the agreements between us, and ask it to investigate, try those responsible, and ensure the rights of religious minorities are respected, and that is what we do here regularly.
The second approach is that taken by the United Nations, through a resolution tabled by 12 countries and by all the EU states, concerning the elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion, beliefs, and freedom of thought and conscience because, in international law - and this is very valuable - they are linked. An individual's rights to belief, to religion, to thought and to conscience are interdependent.
What will we be doing today if we adopt this unacceptable text you are proposing? We will be ignoring the work being done by our Member States at the United Nations and taking a different approach which is likely to encourage certain countries to exploit religious issues in their international relations. We will be going against the balanced approach recommended, for example, by Mrs Jahangir, United Nations Special Rapporteur, currently under house arrest in Pakistan, and at the end of the day we will also be making the situation of religious minorities throughout the world, including Christians, more fragile.
Once again, together with experts working on religious freedom, such as Christian Solidarity Worldwide, I say that this resolution simply increases the danger for those we want to protect.
author. - (NL) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, if we really have fundamental rights at heart, we cannot fail to be concerned by the precarious position of Christian communities in the Middle East. The present motion for a resolution spurs all the European institutions on in this regard.
A recent delegation visit by our Parliament gave us more insight into the daily life of Lebanese Christians. They fear ending up in a kind of second-class position like their co-religionists in almost all the countries of the region.
They are faced with a direct choice between personal safety and personal dignity, their religious convictions. Today's Lebanese Christians want to retain both.
The actual political violence of recent years is now directly affecting Christians in the land of the cedar. An informant in Lebanon said just this week that, even though Christians are not the primary targets, the majority of politicians assassinated are from Christian backgrounds, as are the journalists who have become the target of attacks, and this intimidates the Christian population in Lebanon.
author. - Madam President, for thousands of years man's presence on earth has been subjected to the perils of lethal forces outwith his powers of defence or understanding. Such forces range from disastrous natural phenomena to incomprehensible somatic and mental illnesses. Man's powerless status has been made easier to cope with through his belief in a superpower entity he called 'God'. Different human groups developed a different understanding and a different approach to God.
The result has been the creation of a large number of religions. Such religions are, of course, man-made and not God-made and therefore suffer from several weaknesses. Such weaknesses include fanaticism, dogmatism and failure to accept other people's right to believe differently. These weaknesses differ in number and in intensity amongst different religions and unfortunately they have often been exploited by extremist religious leaders and unscrupulous politicians.
This has led to religious wars and to the committing of despicable crimes against human beings in the name of religion. Both Christianity and Islam, two of mankind's main religions, have not been exempt from these sad inflictions and history is full of shameful examples to illustrate the point. Of course, with the passage of time, most religions became more mature and more humanistic and this is certainly true with Christianity. But this change has not happened with some other religions, unfortunately.
This is why in some countries, mainly Islamic countries, Christians are being persecuted, sometimes with extreme criminal vigour and sometimes with the consent of political groups and even governments. This is indeed a very sad state of affairs, which involves a range of countries or regions worldwide - some of them have already been mentioned in this Chamber today - but it is more specific in the Middle East.
With this resolution we hope to bring attention to the persecution of Christians in these countries and hopefully to help in making sure that the authorities, both political and religious, in such countries fully understand that such aggressive behaviour is neither compatible with the principles of respect for human rights nor with the true teachings of a caring religion.
Thank you Madam President, as you can see I still have 20 seconds to spare!
author. - (NL) Madam President, the Christian communities in the Middle East date back to the early years of Christianity. They predate both Christianity in Europe and Islam in the Middle East.
Yet these days they are often seen as an alien element in what is now a predominantly Islamic area. This is not merely the result of religious intolerance from certain quarters within Islam; the blame also lies with Europe.
Three times in history, Europe and Christianity have aroused aversion and hatred in that region. The first time was the crusades in the late Middle Ages, when occupying European armies took control of sites holy not only to Christians but also to Jews and Muslims. The second time followed the collapse of the Ottoman Empire at the beginning of last century, when Egypt, Sudan, Jordan and Iraq came under British colonial control and Syria and Lebanon under French colonial control.
We are currently in the third phase. Europe's positions on Israel, Palestine and Iraq arouse great opposition in the Middle East, where Europe is suspected of focusing primarily on its own energy supplies, on safeguarding its own transport routes and on giving preferential treatment to those ethnic or religious minorities best disposed towards it.
One possible consequence is that Christian minorities may be unable to hold their own in the Middle East in the long term and be doomed to flee to Europe. Giving Christians and Jews in the Middle East leeway is a better solution, as indeed Europe must do to its Islamic minority.
on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (DE) Madam President, if you will pardon my saying so, Mrs Flautre is talking nonsense. Muslims do a huge amount for Muslim minorities. We support Muslim and other religious minorities. However, it is unfortunately true that if we do not do anything for Christians, nobody will.
The Islamic or Arab League has never championed the rights of Christians as we have the rights of Muslims. It is therefore high time that we put this matter on the agenda. It is an act of justice, whereby I must say emphatically that the problem is not Islam. Christians in the Middle East have survived 1 200 years under Islamic rule. It is in our supposedly so advanced age that they are seriously endangered, especially in Iraq, which is occupied by the West.
We must acknowledge our own responsibility to make it possible for them to survive and live in freedom and dignity. Most religious persecution takes place in communist China, in pseudo-Christian nationalist Russia, in communist dictatorships - and also under Islamic regimes. For me, Islamism is simply a perverse dictatorship and ideology of the twentieth century. We Europeans have a duty in this regard, and we shall perform it.
(Applause)
on behalf of the PSE Group. - (PT) Madam President, congratulations to the authors of this joint motion. I should like to mention that it is appropriate to remember that before the persecution of Christians we had the persecution, for example, of the Jews, and we had and still have persecution of the Yazidis, the Mandians and the Muslims themselves, whether Shiite or Sunni, in Iraq.
It would not be fair or proportionate to compare what is happening in Iraq to what is happening in Europe. In fact it must be remembered that those who are persecuted in Iraq unfortunately do not have, in Europe, the protection to which they are entitled, whether Christian or non-Christian. There are absolutely incredible cases of a total lack of sensitivity on the part of our European Union as regards persecuted Iraqis. May I end by reminding you, not to detract from all others, of Father Ragheed Ganni and the entire congregation of the Church of the Holy Spirit in Mosul, perhaps the most monstrous crime committed this year.
on behalf of the UEN Group. - (PL) Madam President, we are talking here today about the brutal persecution of Christians, particularly in the Middle East. We should not lose sight of the fact that Christians are persecuted throughout the world, however, and I do not agree with what Mr Casaca said about there being very many religious minorities who are persecuted.
Please could he provide examples of where these minorities are being persecuted on any major scale; I am not talking about the chance killing, however reprehensible, of an infidel, but of cases where another religion is persecuted in the way that Christians are persecuted. I fully agree with Mr Posselt, and I agree with much else that has been said, where dozens of examples of persecution of Christians have been mentioned, but not, as Mr Casaca claims, of many other religions. It is not true. Christians are the main objects of persecution, and it is mainly Christians who are persecuted.
Yesterday in Parliament we heard a speech from President Sarkozy, who spoke of the need to defend Europe's identity. What is this identity? Who will defend us if we do not defend ourselves and the roots of our identity? Christians in the Middle East bear witness to our European identity. They have been there for 2 000 years and we must defend them if they are to remain there.
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. - (IT) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that today, with this motion for a resolution, we are taking an important step, because this Parliament must always condemn acts and events that endanger the lives of men and women on the grounds of their faith, religious beliefs or political opinion.
Religious freedom is a value that we must bring to the fore. Although it is true that in some cases Christians risk persecution and criminalisation, it is for this reason that Parliament must protect and defend them, just as this Parliament has always protected and defended Muslim citizens who have been the victims of discrimination in the West. We believe that all religions can play a positive role, a peacekeeping role, to encourage respect for diversity. For this reason we must strongly condemn any form of religious fundamentalism, which is so often a factor in conflict. I believe that this Parliament must always endeavour to listen and promote interreligious dialogue.
There are some notable examples that show how it is possible to construct a solution in which religions can listen to each other and build on common ground. I am also anxious to recall the sacrifice of some Catholics, some Christians, who have fought to free the poor, for peoples and for social liberation. This is why our group is voting in favour of this resolution, in memory of priests such as Peppino Diana and Pino Puglisi, who died because of their stance against the mafia and organised crime in general.
on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. - Madam President, I welcome this joint motion for a resolution, since I regard it as vital that we protect Christian minorities in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. It is important that we protect all religious communities from persecution. I regard it as appalling that people have to face constraints in their daily routine, in what they can do and where they can go, in their ability to own property and to get an education or a job, as well as threats on their life, because of their Christian affiliation.
The freedom of religious observance is a fundamental human right and thus it is essential that governments ensure that even the religious minorities in their countries can practise their beliefs free from any restraint, that is to say without there being a threat to their life or anything else.
Muslims must realise that they must promote the principle of religious freedom and tolerance, the same freedom and tolerance for their adherence that they enjoy and expect to enjoy in our countries, many of which have large Christian populations.
(FI) Madam President, I set great store by Mr Mauro's initiative. Every day peace-loving Christians are under threat of systematic oppression and are used as scapegoats in crises they are not involved in. This is totally reprehensible and an issue it is necessary to highlight. Actually to improve the position of Christians, however, it is important to understand the problem as part of a wider whole. It is not only Christians who are having difficulties, but in many countries Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, Sikhs and Ahmadis also have problems. The list is long.
Freedom of religion is essential for a society which respects human rights and civil liberties. It is, as it were, a meta-right, in practice a prerequisite for the existence of other human rights, which reflects the condition of society as a whole. If a society starts to get ill, it is visible first in the shape of restrictions on freedom of religion and in the status of religious minorities. For this reason we have to show our firm support for the United Nations General Assembly Resolution on freedom of religion.
It is worth noting that in many countries, like Pakistan and Indonesia, religious communities are striving jointly to establish freedom of religion and the protection of minorities. Religion itself might therefore also be a solution. A pluralist dialogue always leads to less tension and benefits freedom of religion and society as a whole.
(PT) The persecution of religious minorities in many countries should make us reflect upon the fragility of the aspects of civilisation which we think we have achieved. Religious freedom is an essential and inalienable pillar of universal human rights. Despite the laudable intentions, this resolution is incomplete.
The EP must speak up about the persecution of Christian minorities in particular, but first on all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on faith or religion which, in fact, affect all religious communities. We should also be worried about Islamophobia and anti-Semitism which are on the increase in Europe and elsewhere. If we focus almost exclusively on discrimination against Christians, we might give the wrong impression. It therefore needs to be stressed that the EP fully supports the resolution on the eradication of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief presented by the EU Member States to the UN General Assembly.
- (PL) Madam President, the Middle East also has its Christian roots. Regardless of the differences between them, the Christians there have managed on many occasions to demonstrate that they are able to live alongside Muslims, Jews or followers of other religions in peace and mutual respect.
Lately, however, we have seen actions by adherents of the Islamic faith that have come down to a practical implementation of the false notion that being anti-Christian shows what a good Muslim you are. The Lebanese journalist Hazem Saghieh made this point recently. Numerous and often drastic instances of violations of the rights of people who, solely because of their Christian faith, are treated as second-class citizens are evidence of the violation of the fundamental principle of human freedom: the freedom to practise a faith.
The question needs to be asked: What can we in the European Union, which is open to and respects the rights of Muslim co-citizens, do for Christians who do not even have a modest fraction of such rights in those countries? Where is there the slightest reciprocity? There is none to be found in religiously motivated murders, nor in widespread discrimination, nor in the failure to give consent to the building of Christian churches, nor in the ruination of memorials to Christian culture.
The whole world wants peace, and people want freedom, including religious freedom.
- (PL) Madam President, the current political situation in the Middle East means that Christians who live in that region are feeling increasingly threatened. One reason for this is the rise in the influence of Islamic fundamentalists, who heap blame on them for every failure suffered by the people of the region. Because of their religious ties with people in the West, they are also accused of westernising the traditional social structures, about which people in the Middle East are very unwilling to speak.
One way in which the fundamentalists express their dissatisfaction is by organising anti-Western demonstrations, during which they destroy symbols associated with Christianity and shops run by Christians. In extreme cases even murders are committed. The passiveness of governments means that increasing numbers of Christian families are deciding to emigrate.
The resolution outlines a number of problems encountered by Christians in the Middle East. These are not all the examples, however, so in my view the European Parliament should prepare a full-scale report on the situation of Christians in the Middle East, or the situation of religious faiths generally. We should also give some thought to how to conduct a dialogue between civilisations that enables Christian society and Muslim regions to be involved effectively.
- (PL) Madam President, I congratulate Mr Mauro. I have no doubts whatsoever about this resolution. I support it wholeheartedly. The only problem is whether we are effective, whether we will be effective and whether we will change anything. There are three ways in which we can act.
The first way is through diplomatic pressure. That is what we are currently doing. European governments need to be mobilised too, however. Every diplomat should bear this in mind. We must push for such actions in bilateral and multilateral talks. The only way to get a good result here is through large-scale diplomatic pressure.
The second way is through economic sanctions. I know from my own country's experience 20 or 30 years ago what economic sanctions meant for the Communist government in Warsaw - well selected sanctions, so as not to cause harm to citizens. We must use this method too.
The final way is through thorough analysis of our actions, because countries in the Middle East and other parts of the world have their ups and downs. This also depends on our actions, which are not always very coherent or prudent. This means intervention, cultural events, and also speeches from diplomats. We do not want to hide our convictions. Quite the contrary - we want to show them clearly. However, we must act not only firmly but also judiciously.
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, the Commission is aware of and strongly condemns discrimination on the grounds of religion and belief. Our policy is to fight all types of discrimination, and we do it in bilateral relations and multilateral forums such as the UN.
At the UN General Assembly, the EU has taken the approach of tabling its customary resolution on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief. Last year, the consensus on the text of the resolution gathered a record 99 co-sponsors.
Together with the Member States, we are paying very close attention to the human rights and democracy situation in partner countries. We raise those issues in political dialogue meetings via demarches and public statements, reminding partners of their commitments under international law prohibiting discrimination on any grounds.
The EU is actively seeking to advance the cause of human rights protection under the Neighbourhood Policy. The European Neighbourhood Policy action plans cover a wide range of issues in this regard. The individual meetings of the Subcommittee on Human Rights with Jordan, Israel, Morocco, Lebanon and Tunisia have already reviewed the progress made in the implementation of the ENP action plans' commitments on human rights and fundamental freedoms. The first meeting of the Human Rights Subcommittee with Egypt is scheduled for later this month.
In parallel with bilateral contacts with governments and support for political reforms, we are supporting non-governmental organisations worldwide that are active in protecting and promoting human rights. We believe that human rights defenders play an indispensable role in society.
We find it equally important to maintain and further increase freedom of religion in Europe. The EU can show and share good practices.
Mr Casaca has asked to make a personal statement, in accordance with Rule 145 of the Rules of Procedure.
(PT) Madam President, I am sorry if I did not make myself sufficiently clear. I stand in total and unreserved solidarity with the Christian communities persecuted throughout the Middle East, especially in Iraq. I merely pointed out, and I intend to provide my fellow member with everything he regards as necessary, that such persecution was unfortunately not confined to the Christian community and that the Yazidi community, the Mandian community, the Shiites and Sunnis themselves, who are outside the majority communities, have also been subject to terrible persecution in that country; that is a fact that no one can ignore. I just wanted to stress that and say that I am willing to provide all the documentation required.
Mr Casaca, you have exceeded the time limit for making a personal statement.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place at the end of the debate.


Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting : see Minutes


1. Mobilisation of the EU Solidarity Fund: Ireland - floods in November 2009 (


Opening of the sitting


Composition of Parliament: see Minutes
(The sitting was suspended at 8.20 p.m. and resumed at 9 p.m.)


Impact of advertising on consumer behaviour (short presentation)
The next item is the report by Mr Juvin, on behalf of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, on the impact of advertising on consumer behaviour.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, why a report on advertising? Because advertising can be the best of things and also the worst of things.
It can be the worst of things if it is misleading, if it is intrusive, if it is deceptive, if it does not play the game, if ultimately, it does not deliver what the consumer expects of it, which is information. It can be the best of things because advertising is also an amazing tool for economic development. Advertising oils the wheels of the economy, and as some people have said, advertising, if it is well done, also gives the consumer a means of making comparisons and, in some ways, it stimulates competition.
Advertising is not, therefore, something new, so why a new text when there are texts in existence already? For several reasons. Firstly, because advertising nowadays is not what it used to be. Recently, I read in an American report, but things are fairly similar in Europe, that on 29 November last year, in one day, online trade accounted for a turnover of more than USD 1 billion. That is a considerable increase in online trade and online advertising tools. One of the justifications for this report is that texts regulating advertising are sometimes completely unsuitable for the tools that have emerged in recent years.
Advertising can be intrusive, and increasingly it is so; it invades private life. There is also something quite new in advertising, which is not covered by the texts. Advertising may be covert. Advertising may not declare itself. There is a famous example on Facebook, one of the social networks - a new tool that is not covered by the legislation - where groups of people report some alleged fault or other in a product. All that can literally destroy a brand within a few days or a few weeks.
It is clear, therefore, that yesterday's advertising is not at all like today's advertising, which uses tools that did not exist before. I am thinking here of behavioural advertising, of targeted advertising, and of reading your private emails. Does anyone here want or accept their private emails being read? Well, that is what happens today for the purposes of advertising.
Basically, ladies and gentlemen, I think that we have to think about some very simple values: respect for private life, protection of the most vulnerable people, because we know very well that children are among those most vulnerable people who receive so-called behavioural advertising, which means advertising that targets their habits. These children do not understand that this advertising is not just advertising that is sent to them by chance. It is advertising that targets their individual choices. An adult might understand this, but a child does not.
Well, new technology brings new challenges: considerable economic challenges. We see that basically, this is really a political debate. The matter has been resolved, according to some professionals who, above all, do not want the advertising world to be affected. It is also true that we hear some professionals explaining to us that, after all, consumers are warned by long and very detailed confidentiality policies on websites. In reality, we know that no one reads these long, incomprehensible confidentiality policies and when they are read, they are not understood, they are actually impossible to read. We see that, in the end, we keep coming back to the same issue. Advertising must be fair, it must respect other people and it must respect private life. Consumers must not be spied on and must not be targeted without their knowledge. Consumers, citizens, must be respected.
Mr President, and I shall finish here, we must therefore have two objectives. Firstly, advertising must be fair: more fair, more respectful, more effective, therefore, and more respectful of private life, but also citizens, that is, citizens who are consumers, must be more aware, not manipulated, better informed and more discriminating. That is the whole purpose of this report.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I hope that you will accept this report and will vote for it, in general terms, in this House.
(CS) Mr President, I welcome the report on the impact of advertising on consumer behaviour. As the report does not talk about the regulation of gambling advertisements, I would like to mention that Internet lotteries and advertisements for these in particular recognise no borders and are easily accessible to young people. Seven Member States prohibit on-line gambling, but it is still accessible in these countries. I firmly believe there is a need to try and prevent the negative consequences of becoming dependent on gambling. We must promote a ban throughout Europe on gambling advertisements which target children and young people, because exposing children to the influence of advertisements for virtual lotteries amounts to putting their future lives at risk in the same way as exposing them to unrestricted advertising for alcohol, cigarettes and other addictive substances. Moreover, casinos and gambling advertisements are sometimes not subjected to restrictions even outside the context of the Internet, so that casinos and advertisements are often found in close proximity to schools. I hope that today's debate will give a fresh impetus to the Commission to propose a ban on gambling advertisements in view of the undoubted public interest.
(EL) Mr President, my congratulations to the rapporteur, Philippe Juvin, on his report on the impact of advertising on consumer behaviour.
The report evaluates current legislation, underlines problems in its application and unfair trading practices, and highlights the importance of self-regulation, protection for vulnerable consumers, such as children, teenagers and the elderly, and the need to use advertising as a powerful catalyst in combating stereotypes and prejudice.
I prepared the opinion of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality and am delighted and I thank the rapporteur for including all our proposals for safeguarding gender equality and human dignity. I call on everyone involved to cooperate closely in combating pejorative or misleading advertisements which downgrade the image of women and to promote healthy standards, so that advertising can exert a positive influence on social perceptions, with respect for human dignity and the roles of the sexes.
Mr President, I would like to talk about the last indent of paragraph 25, which will be up for a separate vote and which I hope we will be able to delete from the report. This indent says that when search engines display ads in connection with a certain search word - i.e. somebody types in a search word and that search word is a brand name - this should require the authorisation of the brand owner.
This may sound sensible on the surface, but it goes completely against trademark law as it stands. First of all, trademarks are registered in 45 different classes of goods and services and you can have the same mark in different classes in the same register. This would, for instance, mean that if somebody wants his ad displayed connected with the word 'golf', that would require Volkswagen to authorise it for everybody.
The second problem is the sheer number of trademarks. There are millions of trademarks in Europe. There are 600 000 at the OHIM in Alicante alone, and many others, so if somebody wanted to advertise something connected to the word 'silver', he would probably have to get clearance from thousands of trademark owners. This is simply not practical. If this were enacted - which I hope it will not be - it would pretty much kill off the search engine business in Europe, and it would kill off legitimate advertising and legitimate competition. So I ask colleagues to vote ...
(The President cut off the speaker)
(SK) Mr President, I would like to begin by stating that it is a good thing a discussion is beginning on the floor of the European Parliament on dishonest practices in advertising, especially in connection with the development of new advertising methods and technologies.
New methods of digital communication have opened up a wide range of possibilities for advertising agencies. Along with the new possibilities for advertising, however, come new problems with hard sell, deception and the exploitation of gullible children and young people in the face of powerful assaults on their feelings. The regulation of advertising on the Internet must respond to the ingenuity of copywriters, and it is essential to restrict methods and techniques that violate protection of privacy or ethical frameworks, or interfere in the special nature of child development. We must therefore concentrate on a thorough analysis and examination of current trends, focusing on using new rules to restrict those technologies and those possibilities which violate the privacy of families and the privacy of children, and which damage the healthy development of the family, and we must apply these rules consistently.
(HU) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first of all, I would like to express my thanks to the rapporteur. From the perspective of the values I adhere to, we were discussing one of the most important topics of the recent period. The only thing that pains me is that this discussion took place at such a late hour. As the report underlines, the persons most vulnerable to advertisements are children and adolescents, whose free will is not yet strong enough and who are easily influenced. This does not only apply to irregular, false and aggressive advertisements, but also to advertisements in general, as we live in a new world where people are faced with the overwhelming pressure to fit in with the consumer society already at an early age. All types of advertisement should be expressly prohibited in children's programmes.
Furthermore, I must specifically highlight the fact that it may not even be the traditional media, such as television or radio, that pose the greatest threat to young people, but the world of the Internet. Advertising is at its most aggressive there, and it is there that it can inflict the greatest damage to the targeted consumer. The most unscrupulous companies show a disregard even for personal data, and invade the privacy of people through the use of social networking sites. This must definitely be prohibited and penalised. In this regard, all of us must motion for action to be taken within the European Union.
(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I fully support the motion for a resolution on the impact of advertising on consumer behaviour tabled by Mr Juvin. Bearing in mind the importance of advertising not only for the economy, but also for the domestic market and consumers, I believe it is essential to take action to eliminate the negative impact that some advertising practices may have on them.
In particular, I greatly appreciate the rapporteur's evaluation of the existing legislative and non-legislative framework and the shortcomings noted in its interpretation and implementation, which have precluded the desired level of harmonisation.
We must focus our efforts on combating unfair commercial practices in the advertising sector by broadening the scope of the existing rules.
The motion provides an appropriate solution to the ongoing problem of striking the right balance between competing priorities, such as freedom of expression and consumer protection.
To conclude, I once again congratulate the rapporteur and the shadow rapporteurs.
(SK) Mr President, the various types of advertising that have been spreading via the new communications media in recent years have become a social phenomenon, bringing with it the risk of exploitation of the trust of the ordinary consumer.
In my opinion, consumer protection in this area requires minimal legal underpinning at the very least, and I agree with the rapporteur and congratulate him on his report and for seeing the matter in such a constructive way, in favour of vulnerable groups such as children and young people in particular, as some earlier speakers have already mentioned. As a doctor, I strongly support this. We must prevent cases of deliberate deception, where consumers make decisions on the basis of information which they assume is made up of objective facts or proven studies, when the information is merely of a promotional or commercial nature. I am alarmed by the development of advertising practices directly targeting private consumers, such as the reading of email by third parties who exploit the contents thereof for commercial purposes. Advertising practices used by companies must, without exception, respect the confidentiality of private correspondence and comply with legislation protecting privacy.
(GA) Mr President, it is difficult to be certain in this regard, especially when the impact of advertising on the behaviour of citizens is being considered. Every day, survey after survey appears, and they all contain different results.
Nevertheless, advertising does pay; private companies spend millions and millions on radio, TV and newspaper advertisements as well as covert advertising like sponsorship. At the same time, there is a dilemma in assessing it. On the one hand, you have people saying that one of the cures for alcoholism is to ban advertising. Yet we have seen the use of drugs grow exponentially in recent decades, and because they are illegal not only are they not advertised but they cannot be bought over the counter.
Therefore, I think that there is a need for independent analysis and proper surveying at EU level, without any vested interests involved, to really establish what is good and what is bad, what is beneficial and what is not, and then we can regulate accordingly. Without that, I think we are going to have different surveys, day in and day out, producing the results that the people who commission them want.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, on behalf of the Commission and, in particular, Vice-President Reding, I want to thank the rapporteur for this valuable report analysing several key aspects concerning the influence of modern advertising and consumer behaviour. In order to find out how to best address the challenges arising from the development of the Internet and new technologies, the Commission has consulted widely on the existing legal framework for data protection throughout 2009 and 2010.
The consultations have confirmed that the underlying principles of the current EU data protection legislation are still very much valid. However, it became equally clear that the EU needs a more comprehensive and more coherent approach in its policy for personal data protection for the EU and beyond. As a consequence, on 4 November, the Commission adopted a communication on a comprehensive approach on personal data protection in the European Union.
Online advertising delivers many benefits to European citizens, in particular, by giving them free access to services. Many of the targeting techniques - display, contextual and certain search-related adverts, etc. - do not involve any tracking and are not a subject of major concern. My colleague, Vice-President Neelie Kroes, has called on the industry to establish a self-regulatory framework for online behavioural advertising based on the EU legal framework and the four principles of effective transparency, an appropriate form of affirmation or consent, user friendliness and effective enforcement. The Commission will monitor the industry's efforts to assess whether more regulatory action is necessary.
As regards advertising emails and the confidentiality of communications, the telecoms reform adopted a year ago strengthened and clarified the EU privacy rules. It also created a clear obligation for Member States to enact dissuasive sanctions and to ensure that the competent authorities have not only the necessary powers to enforce them but are also provided with appropriate resources. The Member States have until May 2011 to transpose these provisions into national law.
The Commission acknowledges that there are certain differences in the transposition of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive between the Member States. The Commission considers that such differences, some of which the Commission is solving through cooperation with the Member States, are marginal, and that the desired level of harmonisation seems to have been attained.
The use of general clauses gives some leeway to the Member States but ensures, at the same time, that the directive is future-proof. In this connection, the guidance on the application of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive is one of the initiatives taken by the Commission to make sure that full harmonisation is effective; in other words, to ensure that the same rules are interpreted and applied in the same manner in the Member States. As suggested by the draft report, we will definitely continue our work on the guidance and update this document to take account of new issues and developments. The Commission is also developing a legal database on the legislation, jurisprudence and academic work which will foster uniform application of the directive in the Member States.
As regards the statements in relation to advertising in the form of comments posted on social networks, forums and blogs, it is important to note that, whenever consumers acting on behalf of a trader and/or are in any way financed by a trader to make certain representations without this being made clear in the opinion or statement, this is actually covered by the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive as a form of hidden advertising. As far as mere opinions are concerned, these, of course, do not qualify as advertising.
In this connection, the Commission considers that marketing legislation is not the most adequate instrument, as it is a matter of freedom of expression. The directive nevertheless contains specific safeguards concerning vulnerable consumers. Age is a factor which national authorities must take into account when assessing the fairness of a practice. The report on the application of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, which is due in 2011, will build on the Member States' experience, including in the field of advertising to children and adolescents, to the extent the data on this aspect will be available.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Wednesday at 12:30.
Written statements (Rule 149)
I share many of Mr Juvin's views on the impact of advertising on consumer behaviour. I believe, however, that preventing the dissemination of comments on social networks, forums and blogs - which, by their very nature, risk becoming a modern kind of 'hidden advertising' - can be achieved by identifying the new forms of offences favoured by the Internet and by extending the rules on data retention to online content providers, rather than by resorting to forms of censorship, since I consider it a priority to respect everyone's right to express his or her opinion on the Internet as well, unless it is proven that it infringes the law. I am amazed that people should think of censoring a comment on a forum that they believe might affect consumers' buying decisions and yet they consider it to be an invasion of privacy to extend the current Directive 2006/24/EC on the retention of data to make it possible to identify paedophiles who groom children through social forums. Is that a case of double standards? Consumers, especially the youngest consumers, must be protected from hidden advertising. Nonetheless, it is proportionally important to protect freedom of expression, which is one of the pillars underpinning our democracies. I therefore hope that the relevant authorities can be given the tools they need to identify the perpetrators of Internet crimes through the extension of Directive 2006/24/EC to include content providers, as called for in Parliament's Declaration P7_DCL(2010)0029 of 23 June 2010.


11. Financial contributions to the International Fund for Ireland (2007-2010) (vote)
- Before the vote:
rapporteur. - Mr President, I wish to thank the members of the Committee on Regional Development for the support they have given to this report. I also wish to thank the Secretariat for its input.
Nothing I can say can adequately express the gratitude that the Irish people on both sides of the border feel for the investment that Europe has made for the economic regeneration of Northern Ireland, the border counties in the Irish Republic and the Northern Ireland Peace Process.
To date the International Fund for Ireland has contributed EUR 803 million of funding and has leveraged a further EUR 1.46 billion in supporting 5700 projects and the creation of 55 000 direct and indirect jobs. It is has also played a crucial role in easing sectarian tensions and bridging the divisions between the two traditions on the island. The guns are now hopefully permanently silent and the economies of Northern Ireland and the border counties of the south are beginning to realise their true economic potential.
This will be the last time that we will ask the EU for funding for this programme, as the International Fund will cease in 2010. We have had many false dawns in the past regarding the permanent political solution in Northern Ireland. However, my Irish colleagues and I are confident that we are, at long last, on the brink of a lasting solution and that a devolved government will soon become a reality for the long term.
(The President cut off the speaker)


Situation of people with disabilities
The next item is the report by Mrs Lynne, on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, on the situation of people with disabilities in the enlarged European Union: the European Action Plan 2006-2007.
rapporteur. - Mr President, I am pleased to have been given the opportunity to be Parliament's rapporteur on the disability action plan. I worked closely with disabled people's organisations, the Commission and fellow MEPs, and I should like to thank the shadow rapporteurs very much for their cooperation. I should also like to thank the Secretariat and I extend my special thanks to the European Disability Forum. I also sought advice from another 100 disability organisations across the European Union. I sincerely hope the report reflects the fact that it was produced not just by me but by the whole committee.
I welcomed the Commission communication, but I felt there were some areas that could be strengthened. With regard to employment in particular, it is essential first and foremost to implement existing legislation, particularly the 2000 Employment Directive. I know the Commission is monitoring that closely.
However, certain grey areas need to be clarified, such as reasonable accommodation or reasonable adjustment. It is also vital that trade unions inform people of their rights under anti-discrimination legislation. However, whatever we do in terms of employment, it is of little use to disabled people unless they have access to the built environment or to transport facilities. That is why one of my demands is further legislation on bus and coach travel, similar to that for air travel. I know the Commission is looking at that as well.
Education and training are also the key to integration. I have always said that Member States should work towards including children in mainstream education wherever possible, but, at the same time, recognising that some children may not thrive in that atmosphere, especially if there is no proper back-up. Children's needs must come first.
We also have to address access to information technology. That means accessible websites. At the moment, 80% of public websites are not accessible and we must ensure all documents are in accessible formats, particularly Commission and EU documents.
We must also ensure that disabled children and adults have access to sporting facilities. However, one of the most important areas is the deinstitutionalisation of disabled people, but this needs a sufficient level of Community-based quality services. We must also destigmatise people with mental health problems.
When we talk about disability, we must remember that we are talking about all forms of disability: people with mobility problems, hearing impairments, visual impairments, mental health problems, learning disabilities, chronic illnesses and other, hidden, disabilities. That is why I called in my report for a definition of disability. I welcome the Court of Justice ruling of 11 July, but we must take this forward.
Another milestone was agreement earlier this year on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, for which I was Parliament's rapporteur. However, we must campaign now for the swift signing and ratification of the Convention.
We must also continue our campaign for a specific disability directive under Article 13 to outlaw discrimination on access to goods and services. I make no apology for mentioning this repeatedly, and I have called for it in my report yet again.
There is no point in paying lip service to disabled people's rights. We have to continue the fight for all EU citizens, disabled or non-disabled, to be treated equally.
Member of the Commission. - (CS) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to thank Parliament and in particular the rapporteur, Mrs Lynne, for including this important issue on the agenda of today's plenary session. I am pleased that Parliament and the Commission have very similar opinions on the issue of disability. I should especially like to thank Parliament for its support in developing and implementing the European strategy for the disabled.
This is not solely about providing disabled people with the opportunity to exercise their rights, the right to human dignity, to equal treatment, to freedom from dependence on others and to full integration in the community. Disabled people must be given the chance to develop their skills, to take part in the life of the community and to be economically active. The Commission action plan for equal opportunities for the disabled provides a strategic framework for establishing current priorities. As Mrs Lynne's report emphasises, the Community's policies and activities influence the situation of the disabled in a variety of ways. In 2003 the Council therefore recommended to the Member States that they comply in full with the action plan when drawing up their policies.
At the end of 2005, I attended a meeting on equal opportunities for the disabled, which launched the second phase of the EU action plan for the disabled 2006-7 and which is addressed in the Lynne report.
First let us look at where things currently stand. The figures available to the Commission tell their own story. There are 44.6 million people of working age - that is to say, every sixth EU citizen - with a long-term health problem or disability, according to their own assessment. Employment among the disabled is no more than 40%, as opposed to 64.2% among those without a disability. Even among those with disabilities that are relatively less serious, the employment rate is less than 50%. It has been established that the 43.7% of disabled people could work if they were given adequate assistance. The Commission's programme for 2006-7 seeks to address this situation. On a practical level, resources must be created to enable the disabled to exercise their rights, to have the same chances to vote as those without a disability, to make decisions on their own lives, to take part in the economic activities of life, to fulfil their potential in their personal and working life and to perform their duties just like any other citizen.
Against this backdrop, four priority areas have been established for 2006-7. In its spring 2006 meeting, the Council also prioritised higher rates of employment and working activities for the disabled. The key point of next year's European Action Plan must be access for the disabled to high-quality, affordable services. Disabled access to material values and services is absolutely vital to ensuring that they exercise their rights as citizens and to guaranteeing their independence. The Union must be capable of better analysing and identifying the development of factors influencing the situation of the disabled. This Action Plan has already yielded positive results. The first European legislation specifically relating to the disabled has been adopted. This law on the rights and obligations of the disabled in the area of air transport has been mentioned by the rapporteur. Legislation relating to the new structural funds guarantees the rights of the disabled to access to Community-funded projects and lays down that the principle of access must be upheld at all stages of the fund's activity.
The adoption of the UN Convention on the rights of the disabled is an event of historical significance. The European Community has for the first time in history signed up to the Convention. With this Convention the fundamental principles of the EU's strategy on the disabled - namely, non-discrimination, equal opportunities and active measures aimed at social integration - have gained solid foundations.
draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Culture and Education. - I will speak on this item, as our chairman, Mr Sifunakis, has other duties today. However, we and every member of the PSE working party in the Committee on Culture and Education agree on the subject's importance.
The year 2007 will be the European Year of Equal Opportunities, as part of which we must also give attention to disability in education and culture programmes. The new digital technologies, especially relating to the media, can provide equal opportunities for the disabled. It is crucial to use these tools for the advantage of disabled people. The European Union has important multiannual cultural programmes between 2007 and 2013. Our group wants to increase the involvement of people with disabilities in these programmes.
Some weeks ago, I welcomed a group of visitors that included some disabled people. We, Members of this European Parliament, can also act at a personal level. Our possibilities may be modest, but we can invite more disabled visitors to Parliament.
on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the European action plan 2006-2007 for people with disabilities identifies a strategy based on the principle of equal access to goods and services for every European citizen. This is a culture that is no longer associated with the idea of passive welfare but with the objective of integration, of active participation in economic and social life and of recognition for the safeguarding of these people's rights. The theme of quality of life takes centre stage, such that people with disabilities may fulfil their expectations while keeping their human dignity. That is why we emphasise the importance, too, of the relationship between the state of people's health and the environment in which they live.
We support the formulation of the following three objectives: to finish implementing the directive on equal treatment in employment and working conditions; to do more to integrate disability-related issues in relevant Community polices; and to improve access for all. Our amendments have highlighted the need for a basically uniform approach in all of the Member States, in terms of transport and mobility, one that ensures that disabled people receive adequate support from the school and education system and within the home, and that also promotes sign language.
It is also crucial to highlight the need to establish and enforce high European standards on quality in the social services, because the quality and fullness of people's lives in the future will depend on the quality of service that they receive. We therefore hope that ever more concrete, practical acts will follow on from the statement of principle. Finally, I am grateful to the rapporteur, Mrs Lynne, for her work.
Mr President, the report by my honourable friend Mrs Lynne, whom I should like to congratulate on a cohesive and integrated piece of work, lays down the basic principles which the policy of the European Union and of the Member States needs to follow as far as disability is concerned.
I should like to refer in particular to the safeguarding of accessibility for people with disabilities to the built environment. We need to remove the obstacles which prevent people with disabilities from participating in economic, social and cultural life. In precluding their natural access to goods and services, we are not only marginalising an important section of the populace, but also, at the same time, we are causing significant economic damage, as we are excluding them from the labour market and economic life in general, pushing them into a life on benefits, which cannot but be harmful.
In addition, although I consider that mainstream education is a fundamental right of people with disabilities and makes a decisive contribution to their unimpeded integration into society and towards combating stigma and discrimination, we must not overlook the need to support special education structures as and where necessary.
Similarly, I should like to stress the importance of the problems of mental health and the handicaps it causes and to underline the need to promote the mental health of the populace.
I also wish to mention and to add that the adoption of a common definition of disability at European level will greatly facilitate the recognition of the common issues of people with disabilities for the purpose of adopting policies at European level which will give greater added value to national social policies in a sector which still - to a significant degree - comes within the jurisdiction of the Member States.
Finally, I wish to convey two points on behalf of my honourable friend, Mr Sifunakis, who drafted the opinion: firstly, the Commission must increase the involvement of people with disabilities in the new multi-annual programmes for the next budgetary period and, secondly, there must be a corresponding improvement in sports facilities.
on behalf of the ALDE Group. - (LT) I would like to congratulate the rapporteurs, who have thoroughly studied and presented recommendations on one of today's most pressing social issues - the full integration into our society of people with disabilities. I support the numerous recommendations of those who prepared the report, which show that today there are still quite a few problems in this area. I would like to draw attention to some of them. Modern information technologies, the Internet and digital television open entirely new possibilities for adapting information to each user, with regard to his/her needs and potentials. These include wider use of subtitles and sign language on television, specially adapted workstations for disabled people and suitably adapted Internet interfaces, especially for public websites. We must encourage and ensure that all these possibilities are implemented. When new buildings are being designed, appropriate attention should be paid to the disabled. In future, improved transport systems will increase the mobility of these people. It is essential that these specialised needs be considered each time, especially when European Regional Development Fund and Structural Fund grants are being put to use.
National law should be improved in parallel, removing all discriminatory provisions that are not in keeping with Article 13 of the Amsterdam Treaty. Further efforts should be made to renounce the medical model of disability and to replace it with a social model. It is most important that, in educating the public, all means adopted be accompanied by common efforts to eliminate stereotypes and preconceived notions in regard to the disabled. Only the coordinated and all-embracing efforts mentioned in the report will enable improved results to be obtained more rapidly.
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. - (PT) It is crucial that the noble promises of the Commission and the Member States to defend the rights of the disabled do not remain just rhetoric. More effective action must be taken, the existing legislation in this area must be effectively complied with and human rights for all must be guaranteed. We commend the rapporteur Mrs Lynne on her work and wish to underline the importance of the recommendations contained in her report, to which we contributed some proposals.
We would like to highlight the effective application of the legal framework for equal treatment in employment, access for all to public transport and to new information technology, and the elimination of architectural barriers. We once again call for a specific directive on disability to be drawn up, based on Article 13 of the Treaty, and for the UN Convention in this area to be ratified and signed.
I also wish to call for the Member States to focus more on disabled children and young people and their education, as well as the inclusion, wherever possible, of disabled students in mainstream education, taking account of the specific support required to meet the special educational needs of the pupils. Lastly, I should like to call for special focus on severely disabled people and their families.
on behalf of the UEN Group. - (PL) On behalf of the Union for Europe of the Nations Group I should like to thank Mrs Lynne for her excellent work. We are today dealing with an issue that is a measure of our humanity. Every time a disabled person is discriminated against, it is an attack on human rights and dignity.
The concept of the disabled being able to enjoy their full rights as citizens must become more than fine-sounding words. It must be recognised that much has been achieved in this area over recent years. Nonetheless, it is still far too often the case that disabled people feel they are second class citizens.
Integrating the world of disabled people with the rest of society represents a considerable challenge for the Member States. All kinds of barriers have to be removed. I mean here not only to the built environment and transport facilities, but also to access to work, medical care, social care, education, culture and sport for example. The issue of disability amongst children and young people is especially important. Disabilities can be physical, mental, acquired, or congenital. But I would also like to draw attention to the situation of those individuals who have become less able because of their advancing years.
I am confident that the action taken by this House on this matter will lead to improved living conditions. This is not charity. It is our duty.
on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. - (PL) Madam President, the report on the situation of people with disabilities in the enlarged European Union is actually more of a wish list for improving the quality of life of the disabled than a factual account and analysis of their present situation. In addition to the obvious issues relating to the built environment and transport, action is urgently needed to provide financial support for employers and compensate them for the losses they incur by employing disabled people who are less productive in the workplace.
The issue of ongoing support of the educational process for the disabled and their carers is both a tremendous opportunity and a problem for families with disabled members. Making it possible for parents to stay at home for the necessary time and awarding them financial support so that they can live with dignity would be a step in the right direction. The European Union ought to make a commitment in this regard and ensure that the necessary resources are available.
An order of priority for activities should be assigned to all guidelines aimed at improving the situation of the disabled, so that our aid and efforts do not become empty political declarations. In addition, the disabled need the certainty that the Member States of the Union are supporting them by imposing harsher punishments for offences against the disabled.
(ES) Madam President, Commissioner Špidla, ladies and gentlemen, this is an important day for this House and I would therefore like to congratulate Mrs Lynne on her report, because we are taking a further step in our task of building a Europe of opportunities.
By means of a broad agreement, we shall approve new measures today that will represent progress in terms of equal opportunities for people with any kind of disability.
I believe that this new European Action Plan 2006-2007 is a great challenge in terms of eliminating any kind of discrimination and, furthermore, it tackles the needs of people with disabilities throughout Europe.
I shall highlight several issues. Firstly, it intends to establish a general framework for equal treatment in work, not just in terms of education and access, but also promotion and lifelong learning.
Secondly, it undoubtedly improves the conditions and rights for passengers with disabilities using air, sea and land transport. I must warn you, however - as I have done in the report - of the need not to create a new and so far non-existent barrier: the economic barrier. To oblige people with disabilities to be accompanied is positive in terms of improving the quality of their journey, but it would not be a positive thing for the disabled person to have to pay for the ticket of the person accompanying them, since that would mean those people having to pay for two tickets, while the rest of us would only have to pay for one.
Thirdly, the improvement in access to new technologies. There is no question that new technologies should break down many barriers for people with disabilities, provided that we achieve universal access to them and provided that technological advances take these people into account from the outset of their design stage.
Fourthly, we need integrated and coordinated responses to disability amongst children and amongst people who are already suffering other forms of discrimination, such as women and the elderly.
Finally, the prevention of work risks. We have opted for a broad agreement on work-related risks, which has already been presented in this House, and which the Commission has not yet taken up - and I would remind you of this, Mr Špidla - and in which particular attention will have to be paid to the possible risks faced by people in the workplace.
I would also like to stress the extremely important role played by disabled people's associations.
There is no question that this is a great challenge and that it represents progress towards achieving the Europe of opportunities that we all want to see.
I join with the rapporteur in reiterating Parliament's support for a comprehensive non-discrimination directive on disability under Article 13. The Portuguese Presidency promised it to us in 2000, as did the former Commissioner for Employment and Social Affairs in 2003. Four years later and unless there is action, the Commission will continue saying that there is a hierarchy of discrimination, which none of us can accept.
Secondly, I welcome the action plan's emphasis on moving beyond employment rights to social care. I call on the Commission to undertake this work with a genuine spirit and commitment towards an independent lifestyle for people with disabilities, to the right to personal assistance and to the right for disabled people and disabled children and their parents to choose mainstream provision, whether that is education or housing, not only employment.
Thirdly, we can do much more on the international front in external assistance. We claim to adopt a human rights approach to disability. Let us do more within our human rights programmes worldwide. We have not done enough regarding the human rights of disabled people in assessing candidate countries for accession to the European Union. We can do better in that area. We should not only move swiftly to ratify and sign the draft UN Convention on People with Disabilities but work with third-country governments to make sure they do too.
Finally on PPE-DE Group's Amendment 5, I am outraged that the Conservatives should try to withdraw the part of my text suggesting that the Commission should be required to monitor the participation of people with disabilities in their programmes. We should not just talk about participation, we should make it happen. The PPE-DE Group should withdraw that amendment.
Madam President, the European Union is a society of shared values. One way by which we judge our success as a society is how we address the issues facing the most vulnerable members of our society.
Last year, as rapporteur on the Commission paper on demographic change, I was invited to speak at a special conference on disability in Graz during the Austrian Presidency. The banner on the platform behind me said simply: Leben wie andere auch - to live the same as other people. In English the translation of the word 'leben' is not just 'to live' but 'to have a life', and it should be the aim of our society to help all members of society to live and to have a life like every other member of society.
UK Conservatives are not persuaded that we need more EU legislation to secure this aim, but we do believe that we need the whole of society to embrace it. We need not just a welfare state, but a welfare society, in which communities recognise their responsibilities for the support of all members of those communities.
Governments cannot do everything, but they can become enablers of individual choice, helping people with disabilities to do what they themselves want to do by removing the barriers that stand in their way - barriers in education, employment or simply in getting from A to B. Governments can also promote and enable a culture of independence rather than dependence. Support for people with disabilities is not just about care: it is about support for their desires to fulfil their lives and to live in the same way as other people.
We welcome this thoughtful own-initiative report on this important subject, we shall of course be supporting it, and we congratulate the rapporteur.
(Beginning of speech off-microphone) ... particularly what the Commissioner was just saying about how close together the Parliament and the Commission are in terms of disabled people's rights.
Commissioner, you talked about the accessibility of services. Of course, we can only have accessibility of services if we have a specific disability directive. I am pleased that Richard Howitt and many other Members brought that up as well. I would like some sort of commitment today as regards a timescale of when you might be bringing that forward, Commissioner. I welcome what you were saying about structural funds. It is very important that we have a disability criterion in the structural funds. I am very pleased that it is in there now.
One of the Members here also talked about mainstreaming. It is very important that we should have that.
Mrs Tzampazi, thank you very much for all your support and work. We have worked very closely on this. It is very right to talk about the European Year of People with Disabilities and to build on that.
Unfortunately, I have not had enough time to talk about education and training. There are so many points that I would like to mention, but really the bottom line is a specific disability directive.
Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank you for the debate, which I have followed with interest. I feel that Mrs Lynne's conclusion corresponds to the situation on the ground and I was delighted to learn of the committee's view that the opinions of Parliament and the Commission are very close to one another.
The most important principles, namely those of non-discrimination and active inclusion, were raised and some issues were clarified or followed from a number of different perspectives in the debate. As several speakers have mentioned changes to the European legal framework, I should like to point out that a feasibility study will be completed this year on how to improve the EU legal framework on the disabled.
Honourable Members, perhaps it is also appropriate to mention that 2007 is the Year of Equal Opportunities, which in my view provides a good opportunity to mobilise the Community.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place today.
Written statements (Rule 142)
(IT) I give my full support to the Lynne report, insofar as it has succeeded in addressing a broad range of the problems affecting the world of disabilities, as diverse as it is, and has proposed actions and instruments that are sufficiently appropriate to meet the associated requirements in terms of people's lives, relationships and place in society.
I should also like to express the hope, in this House, that the statements of principle, which I support, will pave the way for ever more concrete, practical acts on the part of the Commission and that 'people with disabilities' (or, if one prefers, 'people with different abilities') might achieve their life goals while keeping their human dignity. With the work done by the rapporteur in our parliamentary committee, the text on which we are preparing to vote successfully summarises, among other things, the social needs arising from the various national situations.
I would stress, in this respect, that it is advisable for the Member States of the European Community to adopt a basically uniform approach, so as to prevent unjustified inequalities from materialising among Europeans in this regard just because they come from different parts of Europe.
(HU) People with disabilities in Europe today face particular difficulties and discrimination at several levels. In most places even basic, unobstructed mobility has not been made possible, not to mention social integration. It is important for this to be made known: independent living does not only mean that one is simply a member of society, but that one is just as much a member of society as anyone else. Every policymaker and decision-maker should give this matter due consideration.
People living with disabilities make up 10% of Europe's population, and therefore their integration and ability to function is not merely a social question but a mutual interest, since the creation of workplaces for disabled people, and their involvement in lifelong education and vocational training contributes not only to improving their living conditions, but to the development of the economy of Europe as well.
Finding an approach to the question is problematic as well, and not only because statistical data in this area are inadequate. People with disabilities certainly constitute a diverse, far from homogeneous group, and therefore the numerous challenges in this area require an integrated, gender-based approach; this point must be taken into consideration at every level of policymaking. What is more, as in many other areas, the situation of women living with disabilities is often more disadvantaged than that of men with disabilities, and women are more often the victims of poverty and social exclusion. This must be taken into consideration in the wide range of programmes and measures.
(SV) The June List believes that it is completely unacceptable for people with disabilities to encounter prejudices, unhelpful special treatment and limited opportunities. Such experiences are not in accordance with our view of the EU as a union of values.
The European Parliament's and the Council's Regulation of 5 July 2006 constitutes progress, then, and clarifies something that should be self-evident, especially since we have a common internal market: namely, that people with disabilities should have the same rights as other citizens where flying is concerned.
Sweden is a pioneering country when it comes to the rights of people with disabilities. Far-reaching EU legislation, involving detailed perspectives on how people with disabilities are to be treated, might have placed a question mark over the successful Swedish reforms of the Seventies and Eighties. Let us, then, do without detailed regulation and instead state clearly and unambiguously that society, trade and industry and the rest of us as individuals should treat people with disabilities exactly the same as other people.
Let us, in conclusion, practise some self-criticism. The EU institutions present reports on the rights of people with disabilities but cannot, at the same time, ensure that all EU buildings are fully adapted for their purposes. Nor are the European Union's websites and documents accessible in suitable formats to people with disabilities, especially the visually impaired. When do the Quaestors in the European Parliament and the relevant EU authorities intend to take action on these urgent issues of such close concern?


14. Amendment of Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 as regards the implementing powers conferred on the Commission (


Calendar of part-sessions: see Minutes


15. Financial management and control of EU agencies (


9. Arrangements for importing fishery and aquaculture products into the EU with a view to the future reform of the CFP (