Explanations of vote
Oral explanations of vote
(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I welcome the excellent work carried out by the rapporteur and by all the Members who have worked towards the creation of this new instrument which will allow micro-credits to be granted to small and medium-sized enterprises and to people who have lost their jobs in recent years.
In view of the loss of 3 million jobs in the EU alone and the banks' difficulties in extending credit, this instrument will provide easier access to the necessary resources for those who wish to start up a new business.
I am certain that this new initiative will help create new jobs, especially if we introduce new accompanying measures such as funding for training, which will help young people set up investment projects.
This instrument, Mr President, must be adopted as quickly as possible in order to revitalise small and medium-sized enterprises which represent the life-blood of Europe's economy.
(BG) Thank you, Mr President, I voted in favour of the financial measures report. I think that this facility is very appropriate at this precise moment in time and that it will have a very positive impact if it is applied properly, as it was in my country, Bulgaria. At the moment, the climate is extremely unfavourable for small entrepreneurs who, with few opportunities available, have no chance of obtaining credit from banks.
All the banks are pursuing a policy which is basically incompatible with the concept behind banking institutions. I get the feeling that the banks are deliberately inventing an ever-increasing number of additional terms for no other reason than to prevent them from issuing credit. However, without credit, a business cannot operate.
Nevertheless, when credit is issued, these companies are obliged to provide guarantees of 100-150%, making them liable to go bankrupt. This is why I believe that the European Union and Parliament have, in this case, taken very appropriate action with this report, which will really contribute to the development of the European and Bulgarian economies.
Mr President, I want to make it clear that while I feel that helping small business is a very good idea and one that should be pursued, it should be pursued at national government level. I have huge concerns over this proposal, about the accountability of the money that will be lent, and the payback in relation it.
I would encourage national governments to do all they can to help small business, which is the backbone of our economy. The EU can help by decreasing regulation and making funds available at a national level.
Mr President, we were in favour of this proposal. I think it is very important that we help entrepreneurs right across the EU and in Member States to create wealth and jobs and take people out of poverty. I am also grateful that we were looking at taking the money from the existing budget, rather than new spending, and using that to leverage even more spending from the private sector.
However, I must point out that we have to be very careful here when using state financing and taxpayers' money. In my own constituency, I am aware of some microfinance facilities, such as the excellent Croydon Caribbean Credit Union, which helps underprivileged communities come out of poverty. These facilities have been squeezed out by local government and other state microfinanced facilities. It is important, in pursuing increased accessibility to microfinance, that we do not squeeze out the many excellent private providers that are already there.
(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I think that we all agree on the issue of micro-credit, but we should also discuss financial resources. I believe that it should be our duty to increase this financial resource.
We must also be careful not to extend micro-credit to further stakeholders in small and medium-sized enterprises, since micro-credit came into being to help less fortunate social partners. Along with this, we also need to discuss a cultural question: in many countries, and I believe especially in countries where there is the greatest need, the right cultural approach required to obtain these sums is lacking. I strongly believe that these instruments should be adopted first by the governments concerned.
There are two speeds in Europe: the speed of countries which have already applied this approach, such as France and Germany, and there are other countries which instead need to take a cultural approach to this question. In short, I strongly feel that the true problem, what is really at stake in Europe, is that it is not just a question of procuring funding as an end in itself; we must seek to bring about the conditions whereby the least fortunate workers can create employment for themselves.
Written explanations of vote
I voted in favour of the creation of this microfinance facility for employment, since it aims at providing opportunities for the unemployed and encouraging entrepreneurship. This facility, which is aimed at people who want to start or develop a micro-enterprise (less than 10 employees and a turnover of less than EUR 2 million), will open up new horizons for many unemployed people. Given the current state of the economy, it would have been useful if this important programme had been launched sooner, because people have been finding it difficult to access credit for a long time now.
As this facility is aimed at public and private organisations that provide private individuals and micro-enterprises with micro-credit at national, regional and local levels in EU Member States, it needs to be carefully monitored by the relevant bodies to ensure that the credit is actually reaching the places where it is most needed and that we do not see a repeat of the situations that occurred during the last financial crisis.
in writing. - I am in favour of the state providing microfinance to individuals to help them to establish small businesses. However, I am opposed to the European Union carrying out this function. Nevertheless, I did vote in favour of some amendments because it was always likely that the resolution would be carried and I wished to improve the resolution as much as possible. The 'blocking' of the votes on several amendments prevented me from voting separately on some amendments.
in writing. - One of the most detrimental consequences of the global economic crisis is the lack of credit being supplied by banks, which is preventing individuals as well as large companies from conducting their economic activities. The proposal being made by the European Commission provides for the establishment of a microfinance facility that seeks to aid in alleviating the current hesitation in funding by banks and other financial institutions. It is for this reason that I have decided to support the rapporteur on this issue and vote in favour of the report.
I voted against the report because unemployment, which is constantly increasing in the European Union, cannot be combated with a microfinance programme. Integrated programmes with adequate funding under a separate budget line are needed, programmes which focus on combating youth unemployment, which is extremely high in Greece in particular, with one in four young people under the age of 25 out of work.
Generally speaking, what we need are policies which call for an increase in the Community budget and which overturn the neoliberal framework of the Stability Pact and low deficits. I also believe that funding within the framework of this mechanism should be purely voluntary and should not in any way force anyone to use the mechanism under the threat that their social security benefits will be cut or reduced. Unfortunately, amendments to this effect tabled by me and my fellow members in the Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left were rejected.
As Europe is going through a deep economic and financial crisis, which has led to serious social problems with unemployment growing in all the Member States, it is essential for the European Union to create effective mechanisms for tackling the crisis and also supporting those worst affected, including the unemployed and businesses in difficulty.
That is why I welcome the creation of a microfinance facility for employment, focusing on entrepreneurship and giving everyone the opportunity to start their own business. European microfinance will be available for cases where access to banking credit is denied or made difficult, through support for the growth of micro-enterprises, together with mentoring, coaching and interest-rate support from the European Social Fund.
It is also important to point out that this facility should serve the sole purpose of supporting entrepreneurship as a means of creating new jobs, by helping to realise solid business ideas, and it should not be used for social support or to boost consumption.
In the current context of economic crisis and rising unemployment it is important to foster the growth of self-employment, as well as the creation and development of micro-enterprises. Micro-credit will help achieve this objective. I therefore welcome the Commission's proposal and Parliament's work on this subject. This is a way to encourage entrepreneurship and raise the levels of employment and social inclusion. This microfinance facility is complementary to other programmes that support employment and inclusion. I therefore think it is important that this facility should not be financed at the expense of existing programmes or jeopardise them.
I had already voted in favour of this facility in the Committee on Budgets in the context of the budgetary procedure for 2010, through which two new budget lines were created, one for operational expenses in the sum of EUR 37.5 million and the other for administrative expenses in the sum of EUR 0.25 million. I hope this programme will soon become operational and the process of approving applications will be swift and not tied up in red tape.
We regret that a majority in this Parliament has yet again gone back on its word and approved a proposal that takes money out of the Progress programme, which was already clearly underfunded for its areas of action in the social field. Irrespective of any considerations regarding the objectives of the new European microfinance facility, it is unacceptable that it should be financed by reducing the funds available to existing programmes, in this case Progress, a Community programme in the area of employment, social inclusion and equal rights.
The text approved by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs clearly rejected the idea of financing this facility from Progress and proposed creating a new budget line with its own resources: in other words, 'new' money. The amendments tabled by our political group were along the same lines, but were rejected today.
Since social conditions in the various Member States are deteriorating, it is unacceptable for funds to be channelled away from the employment and social inclusion area towards other priorities that have been defined in the meantime, even if it is to the area of microfinance.
Thanks to the Göncz report on micro-credit and the controversy that surrounded the financing of this project, I went to see what this famous Progress programme - which the left is so adamant should not be deprived of a single cent for the financing of micro-enterprises and individual initiatives - is all about. Because, for the moment, what purpose does Progress, defined as the 'Community programme for employment and social solidarity', really serve? That of creating paperwork, and of financing studies and reports. Because, for the moment, Progress's 'target' audience is neither the unemployed nor the excluded, but political decision makers and opinion formers.
Some people are refusing to deduct EUR 100 million for micro-credit from the paltry sum of EUR 700 million allocated over seven years. A little less money for those who profit from the system, a little more money for Europeans, with a constant budget: one cannot argue with that! The time has come to stop observing the poverty and the difficulties of our fellow citizens and to take concrete action instead. I have one reservation, however: micro-credit is necessary only because the 'banksters', who are so quick to pocket State aid, are not doing what they are supposed to be doing: pumping money into the economy.
I voted in favour of the Göncz report on the European Microfinance Facility. Micro-financing concerns micro-credits (loans of less than EUR 25 000) and micro-enterprises (enterprises that employ fewer than 10 people).
In this period of economic crisis and due to the considerable fall in the number of loans granted, it is vitally important for the European Union to create a facility aimed at the most vulnerable, such as the unemployed, young people and small businesses.
When an economy or jobs are at stake, it is crucial to stimulate growth with substantial investment. The facility will see its funding increased to EUR 100 million, the money being taken from the budget for the Progress programme (Community Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity), and will come into force on 1 January 2010 (for a four-year period). The Council must hear this message so that an agreement can be reached in the next few days.
I voted in favour of the report by my colleague, Mrs Göncz, because I feel it is crucial, especially in the context of an employment crisis and of a social crisis, to support micro-finance by providing it with a specific budget line. This is a special instrument in the fight against banking exclusion and poverty. Contrary to what the European Commission is asking, we oppose the idea of reallocating appropriations from the Progress programme to the European Microfinance Facility, because that would send out a negative message to economic operators. We must maintain the Progress programme, which targets the most vulnerable groups, and it is the joint responsibility of the Member States and the European Union to implement it effectively in the current circumstances.
I am absolutely delighted that the vast majority of the European Parliament has today approved the report on the European Microfinance Facility for Employment and Social Inclusion. The planned micro-credit system can contribute significantly to the creation of social cohesion and new jobs, not to mention greatly help alleviate the harmful effects of the financial and economic crisis. During the global recession, it is particularly important to provide new opportunities for citizens who have been squeezed out of the labour market and the traditional credit market, and pave the way for stable, long-term self-employment. Furthermore, it is vital that a simple financial facility exists for those in disadvantaged regions intending to start up their own business and for the most vulnerable groups, which, in spite of the high risk, low margins and risk of default, helps businesses to start up and thrive. The overwhelming majority of employees in Europe are employed by micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises.
This is the reason why, in order to ensure that these companies do not lose, but actually increase their employment potential, suitable support must be provided to them which, in certain cases, is of such a small amount that the traditional banking sector is unable to provide such funds. During today's vote, the European Parliament gave the clear message that the codecision procedure should be completed as soon as possible so that the microfinance facility may already be accessible from 2010.
Mr President, I voted in favour of the report on microfinance facilities.
There is still a lot we could do to encourage young people in Europe to go into entrepreneurship. The financial and economic crisis has brought with it an employment and a social crisis, and it is indeed predicted that there will be another 10 million unemployed people in Europe next year. If there was ever a time to take prompt action, it is now.
With the current credit squeeze aggravating the situation at present, I am very much in favour of the initiative in the report to provide micro-credits for the unemployed or those threatened with unemployment who have difficulties having access to commercial loans for their business ideas. Nevertheless, we must also invest, for example, in young people's workshops and business incubators, as well as entrepreneurship education.
A comprehensive approach to investing in improving the employment figures and entrepreneurship is a prerequisite for a prosperous Europe.
I am in favour of financing social provisions in order to assist workers who have lost their jobs. However, this should not mean that businesses are exempted from their social and territorial obligations. It is not up to the public authorities to compensate for this unacceptable failure to fulfil one's obligations. That is why I shall abstain.
I am voting in favour of the report on establishing a new microfinance facility which will help people whose jobs are at risk to set up or develop micro-enterprises. These are defined as companies with fewer than ten employees and a turnover of less than EUR 2 million. This finance opportunity will be available initially for a period of four years, starting from 1 January 2010.
This will give people who have lost their jobs as a result of the crisis or who are finding it difficult to gain access to credit for their company the opportunity to undergo training, to retain existing jobs and, in some cases, even to create new ones. This will help to stimulate the economy and contribute to bringing the crisis to an end.
We shall vote against the proposal for a decision establishing a European Microfinance Facility for Employment and Social Inclusion. At a time when so many European citizens are being made redundant because of the crisis of capitalism and the complete lack of solidarity shown by those who continue to make profits at their expense, it is time for the European Union to change its liberal approach to solving the problems encountered.
Faced with the insatiable commercial appetites that the European Union's liberal dogmatism has created, we need a policy that protects European workers, the creators of the wealth of which they are being deprived in the name of profit. Again, this is a case of the Europe of big profits and of small, arbitrary handouts. The paltry sums pledged, the lack of clarity concerning their allocation and the individualistic logic behind the vehicle promoted testify to this. This bears no relation to the Europe of the general interest and of social equality that our peoples need.
At a time of crisis, when credit is scarce and access to it difficult, this kind of facility is essential to help provide micro-credit for small enterprises and people who have lost their jobs and want to start up new businesses on their own. It is difficult to achieve such goals without this kind of support facility. Furthermore, in the current crisis situation, banks are not sensitive to the credit needs of start-up enterprises which, in most cases, makes it impossible for them to get off the ground. With the prospect of several million more jobs being lost in the EU, it is important to have incentives that people who are made redundant can access in an attempt to make a new life for themselves, thereby avoiding social crises and reducing Member States' spending on social support measures.
The financial and economic crisis caused primarily by British and American speculators is now leading to growing unemployment in Europe as a result of the economic downturn. It is mainly young people, who were already at serious risk of unemployment, who have been particularly hard hit by the changing situation. Therefore, it is especially important to give them an opportunity to start or restart their careers and to pave the way for some of them to start their own companies. I hope that the new European microfinance facility for employment and social inclusion - Progress - will give them significant support in this respect.
This new instrument also allows us to respond to the continuing credit crunch. As well as interest rate support, people who set up micro-enterprises will also receive support in the form of mentoring, training, coaching and capacity building. I support the committee's initiative to increase the funding for the microfinance facility by 50%, compared with the Commission's proposal, to EUR 150 million. Looking at the huge sums that have been spent on rescuing the banks, it is important to be generous to those people who have been hardest hit by the situation. For all of these reasons, I have voted in favour of this report.
On 10 November 2009, the European Commission published a Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Microfinance Facility. It is related to the Commission document entitled 'Realisation of the European Recovery Plan' and the priorities of the Council, which are: maintaining employment, creating jobs and promoting mobility, improving skills and adapting to the needs of the labour market, and increasing access to employment.
The microfinance facility is supposed to give easier access to financial services to the unemployed and groups of businesspeople who have found themselves in a difficult situation. It is concerned with people from certain social groups who do not have the creditworthiness required by commercial banks but would like to start up in business. Introduction of this type of support facility, which comes from EU funds, has particularly significant meaning in a situation in which lending levels are currently reduced and the value of loans which have been made has fallen.
The situation in the lending sector shows that the financial and economic crisis is changing into an employment and social crisis. The report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs contains significant amendments to the Commission Proposal, including opposition to transfer of the necessary funds from the Progress programme to the European Microfinance Facility. The rapporteur proposes putting the facility under a separate budget line, and also proposes increasing the facility's budget for the next four years by EUR 50 million. In view of these aspects, I endorse the report.
I have voted in favour of the resolution to introduce the microfinance facility, because for me, the top priority is to adopt this resolution quickly. This will give disadvantaged sections of the population the opportunity to take out loans and to help themselves. However, I am calling on the Council not to take the funding from Progress. It is important that this programme retains its funding in full. In particular in this crisis, EU money must not be redeployed at the expense of the weakest members of society.
in writing. - I am delighted that the European Parliament has today approved a scheme for ensuring that additional loans will be made available to small businesses. This decision will allow EUR 100 million to be made available at regional and national level over the next four years. This is a valuable and timely development which will provide many of those people suffering the effects of the global recession with new opportunities. The measures announced today will support those wanting to start new businesses, as well as providing professional training - thereby increasing the range of skills upon which citizens can draw to set up the enterprises which are vital to Europe's economy. More and more, we are seeing greater consideration of small and medium-sized enterprises in European Union policy and legislation. I welcome this new development and, in particular, the European Parliament's contribution to stimulating the development of small businesses in difficult economic times.
The Progress programme was started to assist in realisation of European Union objectives in the fields of employment, social affairs and equal opportunities, which are laid out in the Social Agenda. The budgetary means available under this programme are supposed to be a stimulus for the process of transformation and modernisation in the five areas of employment, social integration and social protection, conditions of work, combating discrimination and equal opportunities for women and men.
Currently, the financial and economic crisis is changing into a social crisis and an employment crisis. The unemployed and people from social groups which are in an unfavourable situation need active support and advice if they want to become independent. The Progress programme is aimed at the most exposed groups, and in relation to this, I think Member States and the European Union are responsible for effective implementation of the programme. The Union should also make every effort to increase the range of directed financial support for new sole traders and the founders of micro-enterprises in the form of monitoring, training - including practical training - and skills development.
Progress is supposed to serve the development of micro-enterprises and the social economy. In the present economic and financial situation, which is characterised by a reduced supply of loans, the Progress programme extends the range of directed financial aid for new businesspeople. The main responsibility for employment and social policy rests with the Member States, but the European Union should be the initiator of these changes. It is necessary to create real possibilities of employment for all, and to raise the quality and productivity of work.
Microfinance is an interesting instrument to provide people who are unemployed or in danger of losing their jobs, and also enterprises in the social economy, with financial support in times of crisis. I voted against this report, as it is not certain that this instrument is to be financed with fresh money. It is possible that resources from the existing Progress programme will be used, a programme that was launched in 2007 and comprises actions concerning poverty reduction, anti-discrimination, social inclusion, gender and employment. Taking money from programmes that fight poverty in order to fight poverty is not a good strategy.
The Council, in particular, rejects a separate budget. The Member States clearly lack political courage. To enable this to start at the beginning of 2010, EUR 25 million is being released from the 2010 EU budget. There is no agreement between Parliament and the Council at present on the financing for the following three years (2011-2013). What Europe needs is a sustainable strategy and not a one-off injection such as this initiative. The microfinance instrument has no coherence and no long-term vision. In addition, micro-credits can already be granted under the European Social Fund, and also under the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund. I say an emphatic 'no', then, to this report.
in writing. - This is a great initiative that will make it easier for people who have lost, or risk losing, their jobs to get credit to start up their own businesses. The European Progress Microfinance Facility will make available up to EUR 25,000 to people who want loans to start or grow very small firms, and who have been unable to obtain credit through conventional markets.
I am pleased that the European Parliament was able to ensure this money did not come from the 'Progress' programme, which is designed to help vulnerable people, but was created using money from the 2010 budget for the first year. The EUR 100 million fund, available from early 2010, is exactly the kind of help that small businesses need at this time of financial crisis when banks are still unwilling to release credit. This will help businesses across Wales, and I am disappointed that colleagues from UKIP were unable to support this progressive initiative.


1. Somalia
The next item is the debate on six motions for resolutions on Somalia.
author. - Mr President, Somalia is a country whose citizens live in very dire and chaotic circumstances, fraught with dangers to their well-being and to their very existence. This House - and indeed the international community in general - time and again have dealt with the unacceptable situation in that country. Both the EU and the UN and other foreign agencies have given - and continue to give - much financial and other support to the Somalian people.
But to add to the country's grave state of affairs came the involvement of the so-called Islamic courts. These are in effect a manifestation of the practice by criminal and evil people of exercising terror on fellow citizens by using religion - in this case Islam - as an excuse.
The recent execution by stoning to death of the 13-year-old girl victim of rape, Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow, is another example of this practice. But the most recent worrying phenomenon in the gradually disintegrating society of Somalia is not just the barbaric extent of such acts of atrocity but also the fact that such a despicable act was carried out by a group of 50 men and was watched by about a thousand spectators. Such a gruesome performance of sadistic behaviour is easy to condemn but hard to understand using humanly accepted parameters of societal psychology.
The Government of Somalia, aided by the international community and the African Union, must forthwith demolish the devilish Islamic courts and those that support or propagate their practice in the country.
Mr President, on behalf of the Socialist Group in the European Parliament, I want to express our total condemnation of the murders being committed in this region of Somalia in the name of God. Few atrocities have been committed by someone who has not invoked the name of God or a religion.
I must particularly condemn the way in which this atrocious murder was committed: a 13-year-old girl was raped, she was then accused of adultery and then five men - if we can call them men - hurried to stone her to death, even preventing someone from trying to save her, in a stadium with around 1 000 spectators.
This event, combined with the acts of piracy which so far this year have involved almost 100 boats being hijacked along the coast of Somalia, constitutes a wholly unacceptable humanitarian situation.
The international community cannot remain impassive. It must not remain impassive in the face of cowardice and the use of religion to justify the commission of atrocities. We therefore have to re-establish order, by supporting the legitimate government of Somalia so that it can take back control of the whole country and establish a rule of law which respects human rights.
I believe that there have been few occasions when we have been presented with such a clear situation which requires us to act. I believe that we cannot remain impassive here in this Community of 500 million people and 27 countries, the most important in the world. We must intervene. I do not know how we can do this, but I believe that we must, and quickly.
The Socialist Group does not agree with the amendments tabled at the last moment, which have not been duly negotiated. We support the text of the joint motion for a resolution and hope that this will mark the start of the European Union's serious concern about this type of humanitarian issue and its condemnation of the misuse of religious concepts to commit atrocities in the name of God.
author. - (PL) Mr President, I have participated in dozens of human rights debates in this Chamber, but I am perhaps especially moved today, because in fact when we speak of large numbers, of thousands of dead, it gradually stops making an impression. However, when we look at the murder of one specific person, of a child in fact, a thirteen-year-old girl called Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow, then indeed the cruelty of the act forces us to think about what we can do.
In fact of course, what is happening in Somalia is not restricted to just this one horrifying, cruel murder enshrined in the majesty of the local Islamic religious law. It also includes - and this is worth mentioning, and has not been mentioned by previous speakers - suicide bombings which have recently killed thirty people. It includes public floggings carried out in the country's capital to demonstrate the power of radical Islamists. It includes many human rights violations. It also includes - although this is mentioned less often and should be emphasised - the recent abduction of two Italian Catholic nuns from Kenya, who are now being held in Somalia.
In summary, we must today say a resounding 'No!'
author. - Mr President, every Thursday afternoon during our plenary sessions in Strasbourg we learn of yet new tragedies, vile crimes, atrocities and grave injustices. The competition for the three places allocated to urgency debates is the best indication of man's continued inhumanity to man.
Against this dismal backdrop it is hard to imagine that any case could still manage to shock us. We may say we have heard it all. Yet every once in a while we deal with a case so utterly repugnant that we are proved wrong. The stoning to death of a 13-year-old girl child in Somalia is just such a case: first the victim of a mass rape, subsequently found guilty of adultery while the perpetrators of the rape go free, and finally sentenced to the most horrible of deaths. As colleagues have already mentioned, 50 men stoned her to death, with a crowd of a thousand bystanders watching the horror unfold.
To their credit, some of the gathered crowd tried to save the petrified child. However, militia opened fire on those who had the decency to try to protect this victim of an inhuman and bigoted practice. One young boy paid with his life, the victim of militia gunshots.
In the face of this horrific crime, what can we possibly do to right the wrong? We must give every support to the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia, as only by reasserting some control and rule of law in areas of the country controlled by the radical opposition groups can there be any prospect of avoiding a repetition of this and other atrocities.
The Somali Government should restore the honour of the victim, Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow, posthumously. This Chamber expresses its sincere condolences to Aisha's family.
It was I that proposed Aisha's case be placed on today's agenda. Thank you for supporting that request. May we never have to debate a similar instance in this Chamber again.
on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (PL) Mr President, we are today discussing an event in Somalia which is beyond the imagination of the average European. The first impulse that comes to mind on hearing about it is a refusal to accept it. You simply do not want to believe that such a thing is possible at all. Nevertheless, we should realise that it is possible, since the situation in Somalia makes various things possible, however unacceptable or unimaginable they may be. What is more, the situation in Somalia affects the situation in the Horn of Africa, which is already so difficult and complicated.
The human rights situation in the region and in the country will improve only when its political situation changes. We should therefore support the implementation of the Djibouti peace agreement, since without peace, stability, improved security and responsible government we will hear more often of tragedies such as Aisha's death.
on behalf of the PSE Group. - (PT) Mr President, I must add my voice to those of all my fellow Members who have spoken on this issue. This is yet another country where religious fanaticism is taking hold and where, in the name of justice hiding behind a religion, all the fundamental principles of our whole civilisation are being called into question. This situation is absolutely intolerable.
I must say, in addition to everything that has already been said, that we must not under any circumstances forget the famine which is spreading throughout this region, both in Somalia and also in Ethiopia. Obviously this has nothing to do with and cannot excuse what is happening, but we must also look into the extremely serious humanitarian problem which is developing right now in Somalia.
on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. - (PL) Mr President, the problem of human rights violations in Somalia, which we are discussing today, extends beyond the cases quoted in the resolution, which do indeed serve as dramatic proof of the barbarous treatment of the weakest, including girls, women and abducted nuns.
In Somalia, where 95% of the population are Muslims and which is one of the poorest countries in the world, the majority of the people live on the brink of destitution, illiteracy reaches 70%, and average life expectancy is 47 years. Although Somalia regained its independence over 40 years ago, conflicts are still caused by competition between clans for grazing land and water sources.
Before independence, the conflicts were suppressed by the colonial powers. Left to their own devices, the Somalis started a civil war, which intensified as the economy collapsed. In such circumstances, the fight against terrorism and piracy should be based above all on the elimination of poverty and destitution by humanitarian aid to the poorest and facilitation of development.
However, Somalia's hard-won stability was destroyed by foreign intervention conducted under the banner of war against terrorism. The divided, poor, uneducated and easily manipulated Somali tribes are becoming an easy tool with which to continue anarchy and division.
All peoples have the right to choose their own way of thinking and their own way of life, and international aid should not be used to spread the donors' own ideology or expand their influence. Not for the first time, opponents are using religion in order to discredit it and to win power, and this is happening not only in Somalia, but also in Vietnam and India, where the persecution of Catholics has become an element of election campaigns.
However, where Christians are being persecuted, Parliament's left-liberal elements do not permit a debate aimed at the prevention of persecution and human rights violations.
(PL) Mr President, NGOs are warning that Somalia has become an example of the most ignored of humanitarian tragedies, which is being played out before the whole world. Large numbers are dying of hunger, thirst and disease, and every fourth Somali child dies before the age of five. The country's capital, Mogadishu, is deserted. Artillery fire rains down on ordinary people. The civilian population is terrorised by suicide bombers. Pirates plague the Somali coast, while on land Somali Taliban forces are occupying increasingly large areas, moving gradually towards the capital and introducing the harsh Sharia law. Let us be under no illusions, the law is applied arbitrarily for their own purposes. If we include the disasters caused by drought and floods, the true scale of the tragedy becomes apparent. Natural disasters we can at least understand, but how is it that in poor Somalia there are so many weapons? In my view, it results from the cynical behaviour of some countries, which want to conduct their frequently dirty business in that poor part of Africa, while we are pleased and consent to the Olympic Games being held in China.
(FI) Mr President, Commissioner, the unstable peace in Somalia manifested itself today in the shape of the work of professional pirates. The case now before us in the European Parliament did not receive the same sort of attention: the stoning of Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow. That might be regarded as a still greater tragedy than the activities of pirates. It provides an image of a country which is living in an Islamic Middle Ages.
The joint motion for a resolution perhaps gives too much unambiguous support for Somalia's transitional federal government. The Council of Ministers of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, which is made up of countries in the region, met the other day. It condemns the Somali Government's unwillingness to work towards its commitments and peace policy. Representatives of other countries in the region say that the government lacks the political will and initiative to commit to peace, and that is the biggest challenge to the prevention of insecurity. Parliament's resolution, however, is important for Aisha, and so our group is prepared to adopt it. We are not going to wipe the slate clean with the Somali Government in our efforts to achieve peace.
Mr President, Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was barely a teenager. She would probably have never known anything about the European Union or its Parliament. Even as she was being gang-raped, or lay dying under a deluge of stones, she would probably never have imagined that politicians far away would recognise her ordeal and commemorate her very short life. But I am sure that as she died, she knew that she was the victim of a grave injustice.
The sickening crimes she suffered are made all the more shocking by the bizarre details of this case: the crowd of one thousand people; the venue of a stadium, as though it was some kind of spectator sport; the truckload of stones ordered specially for the purpose; the gunmen who fired at people trying, to their credit, to save this poor girl's life.
Somalia is a failed state, and there is little the EU can do practically to address the barbarity of the various clans and Islamist militias in charge of areas outside the government's control.
Where we can take a stand, however, is by asserting our own values, which are incompatible with Sharia law. That is not just my opinion, but also the opinion of the European Court of Human Rights. This tragic case merely reinforces our determination never to surrender our hard-won democratic freedoms to obscurantism.
(PL) Mr President, Somalia has for years been the scene of brutal battles, lawlessness and marine piracy. Recently, two Poles fell into the hands of kidnappers. But what happened on 27 October is beyond human comprehension.
A thirteen-year-old girl, Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow, was stoned to death. The child had been raped by three men. The perpetrators have not been arrested or tried. In Kismayo, she was stoned to death by fifty men in the presence of around a thousand witnesses. Aisha was punished, in accordance with Islamic law, for the rape inflicted on her.
This shocking act is not an isolated matter, but the brutal operation of Islamic law in the name of a God who punishes the victim for the crime inflicted on her. I call on the government of Somalia to put an end to this barbarous practice, to mete out an exemplary punishment to the perpetrators and to rehabilitate Aisha.
Mr President, on 27 October a 13-year-old girl named Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow - and let us not forget the name - was stoned to death in Somalia by a group of 50 men in a stadium in the southern port of Kismayo in front of around a thousand spectators. She was accused and convicted of adultery in breach of Islamic law, but was in fact the victim of rape by three men. There has been no arrest or detention of those accused of her rape.
I strongly condemn the stoning and execution of Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow and I am horrified at such a barbaric act perpetrated against a 13-year-old rape victim. As Unicef stated in the aftermath of her tragic death, a child was victimised twice: first by the perpetrators of the rape, and then by those responsible for administering the justice.
This abhorrent treatment of women can in no way be condoned and permitted under Sharia law. This episode highlights not only the vulnerability of girls and women in Somalia, but the inherent discrimination such individuals have to endure.
(PL) Mr President, we are today debating the murder of a girl who was stoned to death in Somalia. We are also aware that two Catholic nuns have been kidnapped and are being held in Somalia. All this is overshadowed by the piracy rampant on the Somali coast. We have heard that it is all due to the fact that in practice the Somali government is not functioning at all. Where in this situation are the mighty of this world? Where are the mighty United States, China, Russia and the European Union, which claim to be civilised countries? When countries are not in a position to intervene in defence of the weakest, who are being attacked by the actually not-so-mighty, they cannot be regarded as civilised. Where are we in this situation? Mr President, I appeal to the mighty of this world: Do what is right! Do your duty!
Vice-President of the Commission. - Mr President, on behalf of the Commission and Commissioner Michel, I wish to share some remarks about this issue of human rights in Somalia.
Firstly, I would like to share the concern about the continuing conflict and political instability in Somalia. Somalia remains a context where fundamental rights and respect for basic human dignity continue to be shunned by armed entities perpetrating systematic and widespread attacks against civilians.
In the last few months, an escalating wave of attacks on humanitarian workers, peace activists and human rights defenders has been sweeping southern and central Somalia. At least 40 Somali human rights defenders and humanitarian workers were killed between January and September 2008 alone. As a result of these attacks, a number of humanitarian organisations have been forced to withdraw staff from Mogadishu; humanitarian access received further blows; and human rights and humanitarian conditions further deteriorated.
The Commission, together with the Member States and other international actors, is committed to helping at this critical juncture.
The EU supports the efforts of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, including the Independent Expert on Human Rights in Somalia, Shamsul Bari, to come to the creation of a mechanism to investigate systematic human rights abuses by all parties.
At the development level, the EU is strongly involved in supporting human rights organisations, mainly in training and funding for identification, documentation, monitoring of human rights abuses, and advocacy. In particular, the Commission is increasingly involving civil society in any programme of reconstruction and national reconciliation, including exchange programmes for civil society with other regional organisations, paralegal training, public awareness campaigns, and women's groups' work on enhancing their political representation and participation in reconciliation processes. Moreover, the EU supports programmes focusing on law enforcement and reinforcing the judiciary.
Meanwhile, we need to work to improve security and to make the Somali reconciliation process move forward. A climate of insecurity will only serve to worsen the human rights situation and encourage violations of international humanitarian law. Any lasting peace in Somalia must be based on accountability and justice for the human rights violations committed by all sides throughout the Somali conflict.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place at the end of the debates.
Written statements (Rule 142)
in writing. - (FI) Mr President, among this week's urgent resolutions, the Somali case is the one that perturbs us in particular. Three weeks ago a 13 year old girl, Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow, was stoned there after having been raped by three men. Nothing happened to the men, but the girl was sentenced for adultery under Sharia law.
The stoning took place in a stadium in Kismayo, in southern Somalia, in the presence of 1 000 spectators, while 50 men carried out the execution. The sentence was handed down by the Al-Shabab militia who control the city of Kismayo. They also killed a boy who tried to stop Duhulow from being stoned. This harsh and inhuman interpretation of Sharia law, that adultery should be punished by stoning the guilty one to death, has assumed inconceivably cruel dimensions; it has led to the murder of an innocent child, who was the victim of a crime.
It is important that we condemn the sentence and execution by stoning and insist that the Somali Government and the African Union should do the same, and that they take concrete steps as soon as possible to ensure that no such sentences are passed any longer. While we show our support for the attempts by the Somali Government to take control of the city of Kismayo, we also have to call on it to bring Duhulow's rapists to justice. As the resolution on Somalia proposes, the Member States of the EU should do more to assist Somalia, so that the country might have a democratic government, and so that the government receives the help it needs to try and take control of all the country's regions.


1. Christian communities in the Middle East (vote)
- (EL) Joint motion for a resolution Β6-0449/2007


Voting time
The next item is voting time.
(For details of the outcome of the votes: see Minutes)


19. Statistical classification of economic activities - NACE Rev. 2 (vote)


12. 2009 Annual Action Programme for Non-State Actors and Local Authorities in Development (Part II: Targeted projects) (


5. Investigation of accidents in the maritime transport sector (