3. Eritrea: case of Dawit Isaak (


Dates of forthcoming sittings : see Minutes


2. Indonesia, including attacks on minorities (
The next item is the debate on seven motions for resolutions on Indonesia, including attacks on minorities.
Madam President, as a concerned Protestant I have this week heard from various missionary workers about the social situation of churches and of Christians in Indonesia. If the European Parliament is to put a country on its agenda of human rights violations, that, of course, requires careful handling of the facts on our part.
My initial conclusion from these contacts is that, among the churches, there are concerns, above all, about areas in the Indonesian archipelago with a Muslim majority. As an insider put it, using benign wording - the church is being tolerated, but that could change around very suddenly. From Java, in particular, the noises that are being heard are sombre - the authorities provide resistance to the building of churches and there is intimidation by small radical Muslim groups. To support this I quote a church leader from Bekasi, West Java, who said, 'Despite a court judgment that we can use our church to hold services, the mayor is prohibiting us from doing so. We therefore now hold our services on the street, where we also baptise our children and celebrate the sacraments. It is a dangerous and undesirable situation. The radicals want to get us to surrender this way. This may go on for some time. Local Muslims who supported our church are also threatened by radical Islamists. We need the support of the international community. There should be freedom of religion for everyone.'
Europe's institutions must put across this urgent message when they talk to the Indonesian authorities - in a balanced way, of course. We are not talking of general persecution of Christians in Indonesia, my local sources tell me, and they are grateful for the prevailing religious freedom. It is also true, however, that 'all over the country an Arabification of Islam can be perceived, and this, naturally enough, is greatly worrying for Christians'.
We surely must share these worries, and we need to pass them on to Jakarta.
Madam President, at a recent meeting in Jakarta, the representative of an Indonesian human rights organisation declared that 'we currently have complete religious freedom in Indonesia. We are free to practise the religion that we wish, provided that it is not the Ahmadi religion.' There is some exaggeration in these statements as we know that other minorities are also at risk in Indonesia. However, this exaggeration is understandable since we are still suffering from the shock of the Cikeusik massacre, in which three followers of the Ahmadi religion were killed. This is a religion that considers itself Muslim but which certain fanatics do not want to be considered as such.
Here we have a serious problem: we know that the majority of Indonesians want peace and tolerance between religions and it is in the light of this that they interpret the national principles of the Pancasila. However, we also know that there is a minority who claim to speak for the whole of society, and this poses a serious challenge for the authorities. Firstly, they cannot allow a minority of fanatics to speak on behalf of society as a whole; and secondly, the government must express its abhorrence at these attempts. In that respect, I find it very worrying that certain statements made by the Minister of Religious Affairs of Indonesia have indicated that the Ahmadi religion cannot class itself as Muslim.
I believe that, if the Indonesian Government does not want the wishes of these fanatics to contaminate the rest of society, it has to be very clear in its efforts to combat intolerance. That is what we, in Parliament, are asking of the Indonesian authorities.
Madam President, the ongoing democratisation of Indonesian society fills us with enormous admiration, but it also means that our expectations are greater. Numerous instances of discrimination on the grounds of religion are casting a shadow over the country's image, obscuring the goals and achievements of the current holder of the ASEAN presidency. Over 15% of the citizens of Indonesia, which is the largest Muslim state, belong to a religious minority.
The fact that Indonesia has become the scene of bloody anti-Christian repressions is therefore outrageous. Although civil society, religious leaders and representatives of moderate Islam have categorically condemned the attacks on religious minorities, we are still witnessing events involving death and destruction. Reports of the lack of involvement and ineptitude of the authorities and the police in preventing the violence are a particular cause for concern. The legitimacy of the restrictive law allowing harsh sentences to be imposed for blasphemy and heresy has also been criticised by the Muslim community, and it has become a convenient tool for discrimination and misuse. In the name of respect for human rights, I am calling on the Indonesian authorities to take immediate steps aimed at guaranteeing their citizens' safety and fundamental freedoms, in the spirit of cooperation with the European Union.
Madam President, Indonesia, as is well known, is an important partner for the European Union in the Muslim world. It must be mentioned that progress has been made in this country, in recent years, in terms of democracy and the protection of human rights. We only need to recall, for example, the ratification of some important international instruments. However, the situation for minorities, especially religious minorities, whether Ahmadi, Christian or Buddhist, has deteriorated significantly. The multitude of laws restricting the rights of religious minorities and of increasingly violent attacks against them is proof that intolerance is spreading in Indonesia. The authorities in Jakarta ought to devise a clear strategy for ensuring respect for religious freedom and promoting tolerance. Another definite requirement is for discriminatory legislation to be abolished and for those found guilty of violence to be punished. I think that the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement we have with Indonesia provides a special framework for tackling the situation on religious freedom and minorities.
author. - Madam President, it is distressing that there has been an increased incidence of attacks against religious minorities in Indonesia. The most populous Muslim country in the world is a democracy committed to pluralism, cultural harmony, religious freedom and social justice, and the Indonesian authorities have repeatedly given reassurances in this connection.
However, Articles 156 and 156(a) of the Indonesian Criminal Code prohibiting blasphemy, heresy and religious defamation have been tools in the hands of extremists inciting religious violence and hatred. Those articles have been grossly misused and the commitments to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights have not been upheld in Indonesia.
I call on the Indonesian authorities to repeal this legislation in order to avoid further deterioration of the situation and to bring the perpetrators of religious violence and hatred to justice.
Madam President, Indonesia's state ideology of Pancasila has, in itself, succeeded in bringing together diversity, harmony between religions, justice and freedom of religion, in an exemplary manner.
Nevertheless, in Indonesia, which has the biggest Muslim majority of any country in the world, there are still laws in force relating to blasphemy, profanity and heresy. In a country that genuinely adheres to the rule of law, where human rights are actually respected, there is room for minorities without mandatory laws, whether it concerns religious, linguistic or ethnic minorities. Such a state should also be open to cooperation from the international community, so that problems can be prevented and society improved further.
Human rights must be protected wherever they are under threat. Civil society and dialogue must have a robust role to play in the establishment of peace, harmony and coexistence between different communities.
on behalf of the PPE Group. - (HU) Madam President, the overwhelming majority of the European Union's population is Christian. The early foundation of the Member States participating in EU integration is inseparable from Christian culture; yet we must speak out against the attacks against Christians in Indonesia, or any other part of the world, primarily because European States have undertaken to guarantee a high level of protection of basic human rights, and want to uphold this principle in their dealings with their important commercial partners as well. At the same time, this brave stand presupposes that EU Member States also respect the rights of minorities living in their own territories, recognising the special status of indigenous national minorities. As the country with the world's largest Muslim population, Indonesia bears a special responsibility concerning the treatment of religious and ethnic minorities living in its territory. The European Union has a similarly tremendous responsibility with respect to its attitude towards its own minorities and increased attention to their problems.
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the situation in Indonesia at the present time is extremely worrying.
Indonesia, traditionally described as a mosaic of peoples and ethnic groups where Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus and Animists live side by side with a certain religious freedom, is today sinking into Muslim extremism. The Ahmadi Muslims, and also Christians and Buddhists, for example, are now victims of a religious intolerance which, I fear, is but beginning.
It is totally unacceptable for the state, through its Minister of Religious Affairs and its police, to sanction such violence in a country which is, moreover, undergoing rapid economic development and which plans to play an increasing role on the international stage. The government must act hand in hand with civil society to put an end to these atrocities and to restore respect for human rights and religious freedom. It should do so fast, before the country sinks into civil war.
on behalf of the ALDE Group. - Madam President, Indonesia is a beautiful country with deep traditions of pluralism, cultural harmony, religious freedom and social justice, but regrettably we are seeing an increase in extremist attacks against religious minorities, including against the Ahmadis, who consider themselves Muslim but who are not recognised as such by everyone. We see attacks on Christians, Buddhists and against progressive civil society organisations. On video clips placed on the Internet we have seen well-documented human rights violations when an angry mob set fire to churches, killing a number of people.
It is important that the rule of law be upheld and that the perpetrators are held accountable, including when they belong to the security forces. The abusive blasphemy and religious defamation laws must end. Initiatives by civil society organisations, as well as the government and the judiciary, are welcome steps. Political support for the protection of pluralism is important, and the progress on the implementation of democracy and the rule of law in recent years should be deepened and strengthened. We encourage the Government of Indonesia to take up recommendations made by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and to invite the UN Special Rapporteur for freedom and religion and belief to visit the country.
on behalf of the ECR Group. - Madam President, the attacks on members of the Ahmadi Christian community in Indonesia are symptomatic of a worrying trend in many Muslim societies, even those like Indonesia that are considered relatively enlightened under their system of Pancasila. Ahmadis, who, having been expelled from Pakistan now happen to have their global headquarters in London, my constituency, are considered apostates by mainstream Sunni Islam. The penalty for apostasy under Sharia is the death penalty. Thankfully Indonesia, whose functioning democracy has made great strides in recent years, does not widely practise Sharia law accept in Aceh.
However, the government needs to do more to promote tolerance and protect religious freedom across this vast and geographically fragmented country. In particular Indonesia's political leaders should no longer turn a blind eye to those who seek to sow hatred and violence through exacerbated religious tensions and differences, and they must criminally prosecute all those who are carrying out such atrocities against minorities. As well as lifting the ban on Ahmadis, the government should revise all decrees and the blasphemy laws, which are used effectively to prevent Christians and others from building new places of worship. We in Europe expect such high standards of Indonesia precisely because it is a pluralist democracy.
(FI) Madam President, the situation surrounding Indonesia's religious minorities calls for our urgent attention. People have been arrested, tortured and killed. The number is growing, and something needs to be done.
The attacks are contrary to Indonesia's tradition of pluralism and a respect for cultural harmony. Those who have come under attack have included Christians, Buddhists and the Ahmadis, who regard themselves as Muslim. As an example, I could mention the events of 8 February, when hundreds of people set fire to three churches and attacked a priest in a city in Java. The reason for the attack was that, in their view, a Christian who had insulted Islam had received a sentence of only five years in prison, instead of the death penalty.
Over the past six years, there have been 430 attacks on Christian churches. There are many examples from all the religious minorities, and breaches of human rights are becoming more serious from one to the next.
(PL) Madam President, the fact that the authorities of the world's largest Muslim state cannot manage to control the ever stronger radical strain of Islam, the aim of which is to destroy Christianity and to limit its influence, is a very serious situation. Of course, we could say that this forms part of a wider pattern of persecution of Christians, since a Christian is killed every few minutes somewhere in the world. Yet let us be quite frank about the fact that it is not only the Christian minority which is being persecuted in Indonesia. We could even say that Indonesia, with its occupation of East Timor, has seen the slaughter of Christians fighting for the independence of their own state before during its history, but this is a different situation.
The European Union's response to this matter should undoubtedly be very forceful, since a failure to act by Europe is unfortunately a sin of omission, speaking in theological terms.
(PL) Madam President, following the tragic reports from Indonesia, I should like to express my deep concern at the situation. Indonesian citizens cannot feel safe in their own country, in spite of the rights and freedoms they are theoretically guaranteed. Attacks on and persecution of religious and other minorities are not one-off incidents, but widespread. Yet Indonesia ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 2006, which guarantees fundamental civil and political rights, including the protection of ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities. Chapter 29 of the Indonesian Constitution also guarantees religious freedom to its citizens.
Public opinion in Europe has been shocked and alarmed by these manifestations of aggression and discrimination against religious minorities, mainly but not exclusively Christian minorities. What is needed is for the public authorities to respond decisively to the actions of extremist groups terrorising religious minorities, and we, as the European Union, should demand that such measures are taken.
(PL) Madam President, I would like to echo the fears expressed by previous speakers regarding the fate of minority groups in Indonesia, which are suffering violence and discrimination due to their religious or cultural affiliation. After all, Indonesia is a country with a long tradition of pluralism and civil society, which previously served as a model of high standards for many countries in the region and further away. The fact that Indonesia has ratified the fundamental human rights conventions, and its election as a member of the UN Human Rights Council, are highly valued achievements in Europe and throughout the world. I am therefore surprised that Indonesia, which is a modern and progressive country, is failing to notice or respond to repeated incidents of violence against religious minorities such as the Ahmadis, Christians, Buddhists and Baha'is, which should be guaranteed freedom of speech and religion. I believe that the international community as a whole, and in particular the European Union, should strongly oppose the lack of respect for freedom of conscience in Indonesia.
(RO) Madam President, the recent tensions in Indonesia contradict the notion of a multicultural society, which has been promoted lately by the authorities. I want to draw attention to the rise in the number of attacks against religious minorities, especially the Ahmadi and Christian communities. It is the Indonesian authorities' duty to adopt the measures required to protect their citizens, irrespective of their religion or point of view. These include carrying out investigations and providing suitable punishment for acts of violence, including those perpetrated on 6 February 2011, not to mention combating displays of intolerance. I appeal to the government in Jakarta to focus on these aspects as a priority. Civil society also has an important role to play in restoring social cohesion at the moment. For its part, the EU can make a specific contribution to promoting an increased level of protection for human rights through dialogue and cooperation with the Indonesian authorities.
Madam President, it is important to remember that Indonesia is a very good friend of the European Union and has made great strides in democracy. I was the chairman of the observer group that monitored the Indonesian elections over a period of time, and I have to commend them for their achievements recently.
I chaired an inter-faith conference in the European Parliament that was sponsored by the Indonesian Government. It is therefore very regrettable and unfortunate that they do not seem to have acted fast enough in dealing with this intolerant behaviour by some of their people. They need to recognise that what we are saying in this Parliament we are saying as friends: we need to be in partnership with Indonesia, the world's largest Muslim democracy, to strengthen the democracy institutions of Indonesia. So I stress - because this debate will be on the front pages of the Indonesian newspapers - that we are talking as friends to strengthen the democratic arm of the Indonesian institutions and state.
Madam President, Members have given a very good overview of the situation in Indonesia, and no doubt Indonesia has made rapid progress in recent years, with growing economic power, and will be looking forward to having a more comprehensive economic partnership agreement with the European Union. All that makes sense, but concomitant with that, there has to be recognition of human rights and particularly the rights of religious minorities, not just in theory but in practice.
Legislation that is used to discriminate against religious minorities must be revoked and those who engage in these activities must be brought to justice, otherwise the problems will continue and the fanatics will have their way. This cannot be the situation. Indonesia has only a little way to go to become an example to the rest of the world and to be a real partner with the European Union, going forward in every possible way.
(RO) Madam President, Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, while also being an established democracy. Unfortunately, there have been acts of violence committed in recent years against religious minorities, as there have been in an ever-growing number of regions in the world. Religious fundamentalism is on the rise and Indonesia is one of the countries affected by this scourge. The resolution refers to a series of acts of discrimination committed against several minorities, which cause tensions between different communities, making them victims of religious intolerance. There have also been reports of extreme cases involving enforcement of Sharia law, which contravenes Indonesian legislation. I believe that closer cooperation is required with the Indonesian Government to promote greater respect for the rights of all minorities in that country.
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, the Vice-President/High Representative shares Parliament's concerns about discrimination against religious minorities, in particular the Ahmadi and Christian communities. She also shares the concerns about the impact of introduction of Sharia-based laws on human rights, in particular the rights of women.
I would, though, like to underline that we have good long-standing relations with Indonesia, with whom we signed the first partnership and cooperation agreement in Asia. The EU has raised the matter of violence against religious minorities through established channels. We have made it clear to Indonesia that this problem has to be tackled seriously, based on respect and protection of beliefs, without discrimination.
Following the attacks last February against the Ahmadiyyah, the European Union issued a statement expressing strong concern, and emphasising the need for an effective response by the government. The EU Delegation in Jakarta met with representatives of the Ahmadi community.
The EU also raised this issue in the official human rights dialogue that we established with Indonesia in 2010, at the meeting which took place in March in Brussels. We emphasised the government's obligation to protect all religious communities and stressed that the police should be trained, including on human rights, to respond to threats and violence against religious minorities.
We are delivering practical assistance in these areas. Since 2002, the EU has funded, for an amount of EUR 750 000, eight projects carried out by civil society organisations. These projects are aimed at enhancing tolerance and peace and promoting pluralism and multiculturalism.
We are also working with the Indonesian Government to foster inter-faith dialogue. Last year we organised together a seminar on Islam and a globalising world, which brought together NGOs, government representatives, European academics and Islamic religious scholars. Looking ahead, we are preparing a major conference with EU and Indonesian civil society in Jakarta this October, on freedom of religion and protection of minorities. Its recommendations will be fed into the next session of the human rights dialogue.
We follow closely developments concerning the implementation of Sharia-based laws, in particular in the province of Aceh. We raised this question in the human rights dialogue last March. The Indonesian Government informed us that Aceh has agreed to abide by international obligations and is in dialogue with local authorities and civil society to harmonise local by-laws with human right standards.
I would also like to mention the case of the torture of Papuan prisoners and the lenient sentences imposed on the soldiers convicted by a military tribunal in relation to recent cases. We discussed this issue in the human rights dialogue and underscored the need for dissuasive punishment for those who commit torture. The Indonesian Government is committed to ratifying the Optional Protocol of the Convention Against Torture and is pursuing initiatives to build better community relations in Papua.
I would like to conclude by mentioning that we are also supporting Indonesia in addressing the underlying causes of religious violence, such as the spread of Islamic extremism in schools and in society generally. In this regard, we plan to fund a cooperation programme with Indonesia aimed at deradicalisation in the context of the fight against terrorism.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place shortly.
Written statements (Rule 149)
in writing. - Violence against the Ahmadis (who consider themselves Muslims) and other religious minorities - such as Christians, Bahá'ís and Buddhists - as well as progressive civil society organisations has increased in Indonesia. The government is lagging far behind in addressing the underlying causes. Investigations have not revealed who was behind the attacks against Ahmadis in February 2011. Two weeks ago, a 22-year-old female Pentecostal pastor was abducted by three Islamic radicals. Islamic extremism has spread in schools and other public areas. Combating discrimination and securing the human rights of all, including minorities, should be a prerequisite for good relations between the EU and Indonesia. I urge the Indonesian authorities to take effective action to protect the life and personal integrity of all members of religious minorities. I call for the Commission to include a binding human rights clause in the Comprehensive Economic Partnership, insist on a moratorium on the application of blasphemy laws, and persuade the Indonesian government to repeal a 2008 ban on Ahmadi Muslim teachings, which encourages such attacks and infringes upon the freedom of religion.


8. Innovation partnerships (


Assessment and management of flood risks (debate)
The next item is the recommendation for second reading by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety on the Council common position with a view to adopting a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of flood risks (12131/6/2006 C6-0038/2007 (Rapporteur: Richard Seeber).
rapporteur. - (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, let me take a moment to thank my friend Jacques Barrot for repeatedly confronting the problems involved in transalpine freight haulage and for being our comrade-in-arms on the long march towards the solution of these problems.
Today, however, we are speaking about floods and what can be done about them at the European level. At this juncture I wish to thank Commissioner Dimas and his staff, the shadow rapporteurs and the German Presidency, all of whom have worked very constructively with me to achieve an agreement at second reading, a far-reaching agreement that covers all the key issues.
I need hardly remind you that floods have become the commonest form of natural disaster in Europe. In 2002 and 2005 we had raging floods with devastating effects. They claimed people's lives and caused serious damage to housing and infrastructure. Those floods hit us hard. There is sound scientific evidence that heavy rainfall is becoming increasingly frequent and severe and that this trend is directly linked to human activity.
The first reason lies in concentrated urbanisation, especially in high-risk areas, with the development of built-up areas and streets, river realignments and ill-considered construction schemes on flood plains. The second reason is deforestation, especially the authorised clearing of river valleys for developments such as the construction of holiday chalets but also for industrial estates and shopping centres. Thirdly, highly intensive farming practices result in topsoil being sealed in concrete and reduce the availability of meadows and flood plains. Fourthly, we have the phenomenon of soil erosion, which is also a contributory factor.
Following the catastrophic floods in 2002, the Commission presented a flood-response programme, which included provision for improvements in research and information. The Commission also presented a Communication on flood-risk management, which analysed the situation and proposed a concerted EU action programme. One of the components of that programme is the present proposal for a directive that has now culminated in the compromise package on which we shall vote tomorrow with a view to reducing the flood-related risks to human health, the environment, the infrastructure and the economy.
In view of the increased risk of flood-induced damage, it is truly essential to create a European regulatory framework alongside the national rules, because the great majority of rivers flow across national borders. A total of 80% of Europe's rivers are not confined to a single country but straddle national borders. It therefore went without saying that Europe had to respond to the flood problem.
This also means, however, that due consideration must be given to the subsidiarity principle in this legislation. The fact is that conditions in a narrow Alpine valley differ from those on a Greek island or in the Finnish lowlands. We must take care to avoid the adoption of blanket provisions that cannot be applied in the real world.
The package on the table wisely provides for three steps. The first is an initial identification of the places where flood risks actually exist. It would, of course, be pointless to establish flood defences in places where there is no specific risk. The second step is the production of flood maps, and the third is the formulation of flood-risk management plans, but only where these are absolutely necessary.
Many Member States have already made great progress in the realm of flood prevention, and we also had to take care to avoid any duplication of effort. This is why there are very comprehensive rules designed to safeguard existing arrangements, and Member States need have no fear of being compelled to implement a second set of measures. Their own chosen measures can, of course, be implemented in full, as long as they are consistent with the aims of the Directive.
The Council's common position contained a few points which, in our opinion, required improvement. In particular, we could not figure out why the phenomenon of climate change had received so little attention. In our negotiations with the Council, we have succeeded in incorporating the issue of climate change, which now runs like a thread through the entire package. That is only right and proper, for we must be seen to respond to public concerns.
To sum up the remainder of our efforts, there have been some changes in time limits, we have placed stronger emphasis on flood plains and other natural retention areas, and we have made the case for sustainable land use and asserted the principle of solidarity from start to finish. The rule is that those on the upper reaches must not take any action that is detrimental to their downstream neighbours. We managed to achieve this in a spirit of good European solidarity.
I can now present the report to the House with a clear conscience tomorrow, and I commend it to you.
Member of the Commission. (EL) Mr President, I would like to thank and congratulate the rapporteur Mr Seeber for his exceptional work in the flooding directive, as well as the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety for its positive contribution. I am extremely satisfied with the rapid progress in the first and second readings. The European Parliament played a significant role in order to achieve agreement on an exceptional text and I would like to praise these efforts.
The aim of the proposal is to minimise the risks of flooding for human health, economic activities and the environment. The text, in its current form, reflects these goals and allows the European Union to fulfil them. The main characteristics are as follows: the directive introduces a procedure as previously mentioned by Mr Seeber in three stages, which begins with identifying the areas at risk of flooding. The next step is mapping imminent flooding in the context of intermediate and extreme scenarios.
The third stage refers to the drawing up of flood risk management plans. They will be coordinated across river drainage basins, basins shared by more than one country as well as coastal areas.
Within the framework of flood risk management, a possible increase in the frequency and intensity of floods due to climate change has been provided for and I agree with Mr Seeber I am very pleased with the fact that Parliament insisted there should be strong mention of climate change.
As the climate is already changing, it is clear that besides facing and abating the phenomenon, we will have to adapt to it. The European Union will have to be prepared for unexpected floods on a larger scale that will be accompanied by intense and unforeseen rainfall. Coastal floods due to storms, together with the increase of sea levels, might pose more risks from floods in coastal areas. The European Union must be ready to face dangers posed by the said natural phenomena.
The improvement of coordination through the water framework directive is an important step forward. The comprehensive management of the river drainage basins must include both elements: controlling water quality and flood risk management. I am very pleased that the European Parliament has stood by the Commission on this issue and also for the fact that the scope of coexistence of both procedures has been expanded.
The basic points raised at first reading remained. Namely the implementation of the directive across the European Union and especially the emphasis on river drainage basins shared by more than one Member State. With this new and significant legislative act the European Union will be ready to decrease and minimise the potentially destructive consequences of floods.
on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (DE) Mr President, let me begin by thanking the rapporteur, Richard Seeber, for the cooperative spirit in which our discussions took place. He has negotiated a robust compromise with the Council Presidency, a compromise that makes significant improvements to the proposal from the Commission.
It is important to adopt a European approach to the prevention of flood damage. Rivers and floods are no respecters of national borders. The measures taken by the government of a country on the upper reaches of a river have specific effects on territories further downstream. In many cases these territories belong to another country. For this reason I consider it important that each and every Member State of the European Union should take preventive anti-flood measures rather than waiting until a disaster occurs.
As with other proposals from the Commission, it is our parliamentary duty to ensure that unnecessary red tape, excessive administrative input and pervasive reporting obligations are avoided. We managed to prevent and considerably improve a number of excessively bureaucratic provisions. I particularly approve of the compromise safeguarding flood plans and maps that already exist or are being prepared. Thanks to our intervention, all maps and plans already compiled by the Member States are now recognised along with those that are in the course of preparation, provided they are completed by the end of 2010.
The process of drawing and producing these flood maps is in full swing in some countries. Moving the goalposts at this stage would have caused unnecessary duplication of effort, and the new tendering procedure would have generated a great deal of additional expense without any recognisable benefit in terms of better flood prevention. For this reason I am pleased that the compromise provides for the possibility of recognising these maps and plans in the framework of the Directive. I shall therefore vote for the compromise, and may I once again thank the rapporteur for our constructive cooperation.
on behalf of the PSE Group. - (PT) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to begin by congratulating Mr Seeber on the manner in which he conducted the informal negotiation process. The negotiations were most fruitful and led to a package of compromise amendments that demonstrated broad consensus and that the Council should accept.
The Socialist Group in the European Parliament supports the compromise that has been reached as it corresponds to the key objective of this directive, namely to protect human health, the environment, cultural heritage and economic activities, while taking account of the impact of climate change on the occurrence of floods. There are increasing periods of extreme drought followed by heavy rainfall, which results in more flooding.
The proposal before us will ensure greater environmental protection by promoting the inclusion in risk maps of information on potential sources of environmental pollution arising from floods. I also welcome the idea of making the Member States responsible for promoting the sustainable use of soils. In other words, the Member States should take more care in their spatial planning policies. The report also calls for solidarity, dialogue and coordination between neighbouring countries.
We know that there is a cycle of natural disasters leaving a trail of death and destruction. According to the World Health Organisation, hundreds of people die each year on account of natural disasters. In order to prevent worse evils, the time has come to move from a culture of reaction to one of prevention. Prevention is better than cure. It is more effective and less costly.
on behalf of the ALDE Group. - (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would naturally like to thank Mr Seeber for the collaboration that we enjoyed while debating and drafting this document. I would also like to thank Commissioner Dimas, because his presence at such times is always very valuable and highly appreciated.
This is a directive that I believe to be very important, partly in the context of other directives, such as the directive on water, the directive on waste and the directive on soil, which is yet to be debated. These directives form a very important framework of prevention, particularly with regard to climate change, which is a phenomenon with its origins in global warming and which consists, basically, in a worsening of extreme events, such as an increase in rain intensity.
We therefore need to adopt a preventive approach across the board, particularly in the conservation of our land. The directive in question is directed at this aim, since it has attempted to stress good practices that can be disseminated, as well as all the infrastructure and knowledge that can contribute to the long-term prevention and the short-term forecasting of floods, with a view to providing significant assistance to civil protection bodies in the management of emergencies.
This is a directive which I believe can easily be supported and I also welcome the compromise reached at trialogue. On behalf of my group, I too therefore call on you to support the text under consideration.
on behalf of the UEN Group. - (PL) Mr President, the Directive on the assessment and management of flood risks underlines the need for action which unfortunately is not always respected in business activity in practice. Flood risk assessment and management should be the basis of long-term plans for engineering works, information systems and other means of flood damage limitation.
This directive should be tied to the provisions on assessing and avoiding the risk of drought, which also causes great economic and environmental damage. Both these issues are related to water management and conservation. If flood water were collected, it could be used to offset the impact of droughts. Both systems should operate over entire river basins and take into account the interests of all the countries and regions involved.
I would like to thank Richard Seeber for his very competent report. The proposed amendments enhance and supplement his document.
on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. - (PL) Mr President, the seasonal and regional differences in precipitations, long-term climate change and lack of coordination between some countries have resulted in catastrophic floods which account for 43% of all natural disasters in Europe, and are often of a trans-border nature.
Human activity has played its role in this. It includes felling trees in forest regions, which has led to soil erosion and faster run-off of rain, or urban development in flood plains. The increasing frequency and intensity of flood events will probably be closely linked with meteorological conditions and climate change as well as changes in river flows. This makes it imperative to take measures to prevent flooding and to minimise its effects.
While preventing global warming is an important element in this, planning and coordination among Member States on the construction of retention reservoirs, dams, warning systems and disaster relief are just as important. In the past, emptying reservoirs in one country have resulted in flooding disasters in the next. Because of the trans-border nature of these events, we must ensure effective international cooperation, both regional and with neighbouring countries, including third countries, which will help us to prepare better and will lead to a reduction in the effects of flooding.
on behalf of the ITS Group. - (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, Mr Seeber, it may be the case that we suffer less frequently from floods than we used to because of increasingly effective preventive measures, but their effects are nevertheless disastrous.
Regrettably, technical progress has made us grow careless, with the result that buildings are ever more frequently erected in ever closer proximity to flood-prone areas. Together with what is often reckless interference with river alignments and the loss of natural retention areas such as flood plains, these actions have created a self-inflicted problem. The agricultural support provided by the European Community over the past few decades has no doubt done its bit too, and the interaction between agricultural use and changes in soil structure are one more reason to rethink the common agricultural policy with a view to focusing more support on organic cultivation. As part of the planned common system of flood-risk management, consideration must also be given, of course, to measures such as river restoration, the creation of links between flood plains and exposure of enclosed soil. If we are serious about pursing the aims of preserving natural habitats and coping with climate change, we shall also have to adopt new, innovative approaches.
(HU) Hopefully tomorrow we will reach the end of a long journey. Two years ago, when we began debating this directive, we experienced flooding throughout Europe, water sweeping away houses and destroying dams everywhere.
My country, Hungary, is a downstream country, a basin into which a great deal of water flows from many sources. Two of Europe's five largest rivers flow through my homeland, and so it is not surprising that it has the largest amount of water per capita. Naturally the damages, too, are enormous. In 2005, at the time of the great flood that has already been mentioned, we were obliged to invest more than EUR 200 million in flood protection. There was a lot at stake for us.
If I had to stress a particularly important element of the new directive, I would definitely speak of cooperation. I feel that joint, planned preparation, sharing of information, and the provision of mutual assistance are all elements that appear in this regulation, and make it clear that we can only deal with and resolve the problem of flooding if we work together.
I agree with Mr Dimas: the future, global climate change, and the responses to these challenges constitute one of the most important questions. It is probable that there will be more frequent and more unpredictable floods across Europe, along with more significant rises in water levels and greater destruction. I feel that this directive will soon be put to the test, and I am absolutely sure it will come through with flying colours. Fewer human lives will be lost and less damage caused thanks to this directive. I am completely satisfied with the compromises reached, and congratulate Mr Seeber for his excellent work. I feel that we have really succeeded in drafting a directive that will protect human lives and increase physical safety in Europe.
(DE) Mr President, in the wake of climate change, inadequate river management and building activities in flood-prone areas, floods are set to become an increasingly frequent occurrence. Population growth and the accompanying increase in the number of economic assets in these areas give rise to higher risks and more costly damage. Besides their economic and social impact, floods can have serious environmental consequences, for example if they hit industrial plants where large volumes of toxic chemicals are stored. Our rapporteur has fully explained all of this.
The compromise package that our rapporteur has negotiated will enable us to pursue the aims of this Directive more successfully. I would like to offer him my warmest congratulations. Major points in his report have already been incorporated into the common position and can be put into even sharper focus through this compromise package.
It is important to the European Parliament that the impact of climate change is to be taken into account in the assessment of flood risks. It would have been very difficult to explain the decision to leave climate change out of the equation when assessing flood risks. One very important demand is that, in each of the three steps prescribed by this Directive, namely the flood-risk assessment, the production of maps and the formulation of management plans, best practices and the best available technology should be used.
(NL) Mr President, Mr Dimas, ladies and gentlemen, the Netherlands has played a major role in the development of the High-Water Directive as it is now before us. It is important to have a legislative framework for assessing and managing flood risks, taking into account the principle of subsidiarity. What can be done at local level is done locally, such as measures to prevent sewage systems from overflowing. This is a way of protecting the environment, public health and the economy.
Since a low-lying country such as the Netherlands relies on many of its neighbouring countries where water management is concerned, it is important for Member States not to take measures that lead to increased flood risks in other countries. It is for this reason that a coordinated approach is called for, and I set great store by the concept of solidarity which is included in this proposed directive and mentioned more explicitly in Amendments 48 and 61 of the compromise package, which I wholeheartedly support.
In addition to the term 'solidarity', it is also important to involve the expected climate change and its potential implications in drafts of risk management plans for floods, so as to prepare ourselves for the future in the best way we can. All that is left for me to do now is to extend warm thanks to the rapporteur, Mr Seeber, for the excellent cooperation and to congratulate him on this result.
Mr President, I would like to thank all the speakers in tonight's debate for their positive contributions.
A number of key elements have been included in the overall compromise package that is now proposed. Most importantly it contains: a clearer and earlier attention to the impact of climate change in the preliminary assessment of flood risks; an agreement on the earlier date of 2011 for the first preliminary flood risk assessment, thus leaving Member States more time to prepare the flood maps; a strengthened role of flood plains and the promotion of sustainable land use practices in flood risk management; sound coordination - also in relation to implementation - with the water framework directive and a link to the cost recovery principles in that directive; a further strengthening of the language on solidarity in river basin districts; and last but not least, a requirement to set clear priorities for the implementation of measures included in the flood risk management plans.
I know that these elements were all important to Parliament at first reading and in the committee this time around. I believe that the proposed current compromise will satisfy Parliament, as important ground has been won on key principles of sound flood risk management practices. I am also particularly pleased to note the importance placed by both Parliament and the Council on this directive, which was only proposed by the Commission 13 months ago. It shows that, faced with the serious challenge of preparing Europe for the risks of possibly increased flooding, agreements can be reached relatively rapidly.
To conclude, the Commission is very pleased with the outcome of negotiations. The Commission can accept the proposed compromise amendments in full and I wish to thank and congratulate once more the rapporteur, Mr Seeber, for all his efforts to reach an agreement at second reading.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Wednesday at 11.30 a.m.
Written statements (Rule 142)
in writing. - (HU) It is extremely important for Hungary that the European Union enact a directive regulating a common defence against flooding. My country is typically a downstream country to which 95% of fresh water comes from rivers outside its national borders. Therefore, it is important that within a flood plain area the downstream countries be involved as well in the tasks of prevention and defence. I trust that the Austrian, Slovak and Romanian experts will collaborate smoothly with Hungarian water officials in this task. Likewise, I consider it important that flood protection plans contain those potential sources of danger which can cause environmental pollution in the event of a flood. In such cases there is often a flooded industrial plant or another factory that causes more harm than the water damage itself. Since just like air pollution, flooding knows no borders, third countries, such as the Ukraine, should be involved in implementing the directive.
in writing. - Through an organisation I chair in Ireland called Hope Project, I have been participating in Commission research entitled Rescuing Disabled People in Emergencies. In this research we have identified flooding as a most significant risk for elderly people, children and people with disabilities. We have just embarked on follow-up research that looks specifically at flooding.
There are two reasons why flooding is becoming such a problem. First is climate change, with the possibility of rising sea levels, and in Ireland, increased rainfall. Secondly, throughout Europe, but especially in Ireland, there is a trend of building on flood plains. It is not uncommon to have fields that were under water for several weeks every year to now be the site of estates with 200 houses. Eventually this practice will catch up with us.
I encourage the House to establish common sense and preventative action in the area of floods and flood control.