2010 progress report on Iceland
The next item is the Council and Commission statements on the 2010 progress report on Iceland.
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I greatly appreciate the European Parliament's active involvement in the enlargement process and its constructive participation in the general debate on enlargement, and, of course, specifically in the accession process of Iceland. As one of the most successful Union policies in EU history, the enlargement of the European Union is among the most important of our Presidency's priorities.
On 17 June 2010, the European Council unanimously decided to grant Iceland candidate status. The first meeting of the accession conference at ministerial level took place on 27 July 2010, and November 2010 saw the start of the screening process, which is proceeding as planned. The next accession conference at ministerial level is scheduled for 27 June; this way, we will have the opportunity to take stock of the results achieved and, we hope, open up as many chapters as possible.
There are several particularly important areas which I would like to point out specifically. Parliament's draft resolution also identifies these issues. In its 2010 report on the results achieved, the Commission concluded that Iceland meets the political criteria required for membership, and even though it was hit hard by the economic and financial crisis, it is suitably prepared to take the measures necessary to meet the requirements of EU membership. On 14 December 2010, the Council recalled, in its conclusions, that Iceland is a democracy that has a long history of good functioning, with strong institutions and close relations to the EU. It also concluded that Iceland's general preparedness was sufficient for it to adopt and apply the EU acquis, in particular, due to the fact that the country is a member of the European Economic Area and party to the Schengen Agreement. Iceland can be considered a functioning market economy and may, in the medium term, regain its ability to hold its own against the competitive pressure and market forces present in the Single Market.
The Council recalled that the negotiations are aimed at Iceland fully adopting and applying the EU acquis. The course of the negotiations will be determined by whether Iceland meets all of its obligations under the EEA Agreement, taking full account, among other things, of the European Council conclusions of 17 June 2010, and also by the results it achieves in eliminating other deficiencies identified in the Commission's opinion. At the same time, the Council recalled, on the one hand, that while the accession negotiations are in progress, the EEA Agreement will continue to represent the fundamental treaty basis between Iceland and the EU and, on the other, that Iceland has also been an active and constructive partner over the past two years within this framework and with regard to the Schengen Area. The country has also achieved good results in applying the developing EU acquis. The Council therefore encouraged Iceland to continue this practice.
The European Parliament's draft resolution paints a comprehensive picture of the results achieved and the tasks to be completed. As regards the latter, I would like to draw your attention to our common task, that is, the necessity for appropriate and in-depth communication with the public, both with regard to Icelandic and EU citizens. In the light of the above, I would once again like to point out that there is still very much work to be done, including during the Hungarian Presidency. As regards the Presidency, we are naturally counting on all Member States, the Commission and, of course, the European Parliament, to support Iceland in this endeavour. It is essential that we maintain the impetus of the work and thereby move the negotiations forward as much as possible while still in this half-year.
I am convinced that Iceland's accession can become a success story. It may give impetus to the entire enlargement policy and enhance its success. The motto and goal of the Hungarian Presidency is a strong Europe. All progress made in Iceland's accession process contributes to the achievement of this.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, today's debate on Iceland and the next steps in its accession process is very opportune.
I would like to thank the House for its support for Icelandic membership and to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Preda, for his high quality report. The resolution under discussion is a helpful contribution to the process: it delivers the right messages to Iceland at the right moment.
The assessment of Iceland's compliance with the acquis - the screening exercise - is on track. Since November 2010, 24 chapters have been discussed and 23 bilateral screening meetings have been completed, covering fisheries, agriculture, environment, regional policy and financial services.
Screening is an important technical process and the meetings have already identified sensitive issues and challenges in key chapters, such as agriculture, environment and fisheries. This stage of the negotiation process will be completed by June 2011.
I can confirm that we expect actual negotiations to start towards the end of the Hungarian Presidency, with the opening of some chapters at the accession conference scheduled for 27 June 2011. This is an ambitious but achievable timetable and all sides are committed to moving forward.
The Commission stands ready to take Iceland's specificities and expectations into account, within the existing approach on accession negotiations and fully safeguarding the principles and rules of the Union. We therefore aim to work in an open and constructive spirit to find solutions acceptable to both sides, in a way that reflects the high level of cooperation between the European Union and the Icelandic authorities. As with any accession so far, it is to be expected that this will not always be an easy task, but we trust that we have embarked with Iceland on a successful journey.
As regards Icesave, and as referred to in your resolution, the Commission would welcome a swift resolution of this matter in the interests of all the parties involved.
On the economic front, Iceland's banking and fiscal consolidation in the framework of the IMF programme has been impressive. The adjustment programme is on track and the government is committed to further consolidation. Enhanced debt restructuring will help to strengthen economic recovery. The government is also working on a strategy for the gradual lifting of capital controls. This will contribute to an improved business climate.
Let me also briefly mention the support measures we are putting in place under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA). There is provision for a total indicative envelope of EUR 28 million for the next three years to support strengthening of administrative capacity and to prepare Iceland for management of the structural funds.
Good progress is being made on finalising the national IPA programme for 2011 and a number of specific activities have started in the framework of the Technical Assistance and Information Exchange (TAIEX) programme.
I fully share your views on the need for a fact-based public debate on EU accession. It can indeed play a decisive role in increasing understanding of the realities of the policies and actions of the European Union, and can help to dispel myths. Furthermore, I warmly welcome the fact that the Icelandic authorities have started intensive communication activities.
It is encouraging to note that public opinion in Iceland has improved significantly in favour of the EU over the past year - both in relation to support for continuing the accession process and in terms of the attitude towards membership of the EU and its image.
The Commission is stepping up its own information and communication activities to facilitate well informed public debate. The European Union Delegation in Reykjavík is fully operational and actively involved in communication activities, and an EU info centre is planned.
With the screening period almost over, I am very much looking forward to starting to open the various chapters with Iceland.
Mr President, I would like to begin by welcoming the presence of the Commission and Council in the Chamber, as well as the fruitful cooperation we have had so far with these two institutions, including in drafting this resolution.
Just like nine months ago, when we announced Iceland's application to join the European Union, we have decided to touch on four main points in this report.
1. Political criteria. Iceland excels in this respect, with a strong tradition of democracy. In addition to this, I believe that we must welcome the progress made during recent months on strengthening the independence of the judiciary, removing the predominant position of the Minister for Justice on appointing magistrates and on increasing the latter's independence. At the same time, these measures must be implemented rigorously.
2. Economic criteria. As a member of the European Economic Area, Iceland already fulfils a large proportion of a Member State's obligations. I welcome the agreement on the Icesave legislation. I hope that, as indicated by the surveys, the Icelandic population will decide to support it in the referendum to be held in three days' time, thereby ensuring that this bilateral dispute disappears from the negotiation process for accession to the EU.
3. Regional cooperation is also an important factor. Iceland's accession to the EU offers the Union a unique opportunity to strengthen its presence in the Arctic region in general, and on the Arctic Council in particular.
Last but not least, public opinion is vital to ensuring that the accession process culminates in success. With this in mind, I believe that encouragement must be given to the initiative from the authorities in Reykjavik to launch a public debate and consult with all the stakeholders in this project. This is all the more important as opinion polls indicate Icelanders' support for continuing the accession negotiations.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, tomorrow's vote is one of the steps which will soon lead to the accession of Iceland to the European Union.
Iceland has made significant progress, as Mr Preda said. I will mention a few examples: the strengthening of judicial independence, a special commission of inquiry to investigate and analyse the processes that led to the collapse of the Icelandic banking system, the creation of a joint Parliamentary Committee between the European Union and Iceland, the situation regarding entry into the euro area, increased experience in the renewable energy sector.
The very thorny issue of 'Icesave remains open, and on Saturday there will be a referendum which will bring Icelanders to the polls. Although the outcome of the referendum is a matter of debate, I think it has very strong democratic value because it gives the people of Iceland a sense of responsibility and involves them even more in this delicate stage of negotiations. Although the first referendum did not bring a positive result, the Icelandic Government has worked hard to create a broad coalition capable of explaining to citizens the reason for Iceland's commitment to reimbursing the UK and the Netherlands for the damage they suffered.
Europe's role at this time should be one of patience and respect, without exerting excessive pressure which might cause some sort of self-defence and closure in Icelandic society.
With regard to fisheries and agriculture, I believe that Europe and Iceland must find the best solution to meet the criteria established in the Treaty and to preserve the Icelandic economy, ecosystems and the country's specific characteristics.
The accession of Iceland to the European Union will mean that Europe moves towards the North Pole, with significant positive effects in the political, economic, environmental and scientific fields. It is clear that belonging to Europe, sixty years on, is still an attractive possibility.
on behalf of the ALDE Group. - Mr President, I am pleased to learn from the Commissioner that screening the accession chapters relating to Iceland, which began in November of last year, is expected to be completed shortly.
Of course, Iceland, as a member of the EEA, has had a major advantage in that they have already adopted a significant part of the acquis. I am also pleased to note from opinion polls in Iceland that 65% of the Icelandic people want the negotiations to continue. I will use my position as chair of the JPC to prevail upon the Icelandic people not to take up entrenched positions until such time as they know exactly what the deal is later on this year.
The second meeting of the EU-Icelandic Joint Parliamentary Committee will take place in Reykjavík on 26 and 27 April. It was established last year and I genuinely believe that it is an important forum for dialogue and cooperation between the EU and the Icelandic Parliament.
I have to say that I am disappointed that the coastal states did not reach an agreement in Oslo at the beginning of March. It is essential that agreement be reached. We cannot fish one million tonnes of mackerel between the four coastal states while we are being told that the scientific advice is for only half of that.
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. - Mr President, a small country always causes a lot of headaches to the EU when it wants to join, and Iceland's headaches as we know are fisheries, the environment and everything else the Commissioner mentioned. However, we have a recipe and this Chamber could adopt a more welcoming attitude, because small countries need to be treated tenderly.
I always admire Mr Tannock's principled, political approach towards the acquis and what Iceland is or is not doing. This time, however, my group and I disapprove of the radical tone of those amendments and that is why we very much ask for a compromise to be found by tomorrow with the rapporteur. I already envisage six extra chairs in this Parliament and an extra booth for interpreters.
on behalf of the ECR Group. - Mr President, the ECR Group fully supports Icelandic accession to the European Union, although the decision is firmly a matter for Icelanders alone in a referendum.
Iceland is a small, stable and wealthy democracy and a founder member of NATO and the Council of Europe. Its economy is heavily dependent on fishing, however, having had a disastrous venture into financial services, and Iceland is therefore likely to demand a significant concession to protect its fishing industries if it ever joins the EU. This would then, hopefully, provide the UK and other Member States with an ideal opportunity to push for broader and further reform of the controversial common fisheries policy.
With regard to whaling, I make no apologies for it. I do not like bullfighting or cockfighting either but these are, believe it or not, allowed in some parts of the EU on the grounds of national culture, so if Iceland joins the EU, it must be allowed - in my personal view - to safeguard its whaling industry if it insists on so doing.
Finally, Iceland must commit to repaying monies owed to the UK and the Netherlands after the collapse of Icesave. A negative result in the forthcoming referendum in Iceland on this issue could prove a serious handicap with regard to support from the UK Government.
on behalf of the EFD Group. - Mr President, in Britain, the first day of April is called April Fool's Day and people take great delight in fooling one another. So when some report that Iceland is on course to join the EU next year, I think: 'April Fool!' In reality, a survey has shown that 64% of Icelanders want to remain independent, only 24% want to carry on applying for EU membership and, indeed, 60% of Icelandic businesses are against it.
It is also said that Iceland wants the security of the euro. April Fool! Even Portugal's own banks are currently refusing to buy Portuguese bonds.
Iceland will neither give up its rich fishing grounds - producing 40% of its exports - to join the disastrous common fisheries policy, nor abandon an Icelandic Parliament that is more than 1 000 years old and the winner of a UNESCO award for democracy.
Even with a banking hangover, Iceland, like Britain, remains better off outside. No fooling there!
I got a little confused there, Mr Campbell Bannerman, with the April Fool thing. It is 6 April today, I just double checked, but I suppose you can declare April Fool's day as any day you want!
Mr President, as is so common here, this debate has little connection to reality and none whatsoever to democracy.
Most here talk as though Iceland being sucked into the Euro black hole is a done deal. But that is not the message coming from Icelanders. Current opinion polls show that those who wish to keep their independence outnumber the Euro-Quislings and Europhiles nearly two to one. Seventy-five percent of Icelanders wisely do not trust the EU. The only Icelandic party in favour of membership has slumped from 30% to 18% in the polls.
It is the same all over Europe. While the political elite move to ever closer union and federal empire, the people want freedom and independence. Such mismatches are the seedbed of revolution. Congratulate yourselves on accession progress all you like, but the coming financial meltdown in the countries being crushed in your Euro straightjacket will be costly to us all, but fatal to your Utopia. Iceland, and the nations now stuck in your raspberry Reich, will be free at last.
(SV) Mr President, Iceland is a small nation in terms of its population, with around 300 000 inhabitants, but it is a great nation. I really want to emphasise what has been said here. Iceland has democratic traditions, it has an impressive culture, and it was actually also able to provide social security long before other countries were able to. Clearly, we could get bogged down talking about the economic excesses of 2008, but there have been such excesses in more countries than just little Iceland. It is clear that when a small nation with a population of 300 000 is affected by the unrestrained market economy, there are no inertia effects in the administration. That is something that we should not forget when we talk about a country, an island nation, in the Arctic region.
I also understand very well that the Icelanders are interested in fishing. It is also the branch of industry that has made it possible for generation after generation to live on the island. We have to be careful when we talk about a small nation that we do not fall into a kind of big brother role. Iceland is naturally subject to scrutiny by the EU, and I would like to say that it is coping with it better than many current Member States would have done if they had been subject to as rigorous scrutiny as we are now subjecting Iceland to. By that, I do not mean that it is wrong. I also believe that it will be easier for Norway to draw closer to the EU and eventually become a Member if Iceland joins. Iceland should be welcomed. Iceland will breathe life into the EU and it is certainly not a sacrificial offering.
Mr President, I would like to thank the rapporteur. The motion for a resolution before us is balanced and covers all key aspects of the progress report. With 33 chapters discussed in the progress report, Iceland moves forward quickly to meeting the criteria to join the EU. The reference in the motion to the report of the special investigation committee into the collapse of the Icelandic banking system is important. The fact that justice will be served on the culprits of the crisis is welcome. Perhaps the EU and its Member States could copy Iceland's sensible approach. However, there are two issues I wish to raise this evening: Icesave and mackerel. The referendum at the end of this week will hopefully bring an end to the saga.
However, I was disappointed that the second referendum was necessary after the intense renegotiation and the approval of the Althingi, the Icelandic Parliament. On mackerel, the unilateral increase of quotas without discussion and the consequences for neighbouring fleets was short-sighted. The need to resolve issues surrounding fisheries is essential to the success of the accession negotiations.
Finally, I would like to wish the second JPC, led by Pat the Cope Gallagher, to Reykjavík on 26 and 27 April, well.
Mr President, I am glad to hear that a majority of the Icelanders in recent opinion polls say that they have no intention of joining the EU because, frankly, why do we want them to join? What exactly are they going to bring to our European club? They have got a collapsed economy, their banks have defaulted, their volcano closed our airspace for nine days - I presume we would have to pick up the bill for that if it happens again - and now they are plundering our mackerel stocks.
In 2005, Iceland landed 367 tonnes of north-east Atlantic mackerel. This year, they intend to land 150 000 tonnes. What kind of good management - sustainable management of fisheries - do you call that? They always pride themselves on having a sustainable fishery and they laugh at the common fisheries policy that we employ. This is almost criminal. This is almost illegal fishing and there is no way we should invite them to join the EU.
(FR) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, let me begin with my usual refrain: Parliament has only one seat, Strasbourg.
As you know, the Committee on Fisheries is concerned about the mackerel situation. I am particularly troubled by the recent breakdown of negotiations between the European Union, Iceland and the Faroe Islands. For over 10 years, the mackerel quota has been allocated using a fixed allocation key based on historical catches for each coastal State.
Since 2010, Iceland has been demanding new, much higher quotas, citing a hypothetical geographic redistribution of mackerel stocks caused by climate change. Iceland therefore suddenly - as Mr Stevenson has just said - increased its catch quota from 2 000 tonnes to 130 000 tonnes in 2010. That is an increase of over 6 500%, ladies and gentlemen.
This decision is unacceptable because it has been taken unilaterally and penalises EU fishermen. What is more, it sends a very negative message in the context of Iceland's accession negotiations. We cannot accept this unilateral decision. We would like to see a rapid resolution of the conflict between Iceland and the European Union. Iceland needs to adapt to our common fisheries policy, rather than our common fisheries policy changing for Iceland's benefit. In my view, Iceland is playing a dangerous game by imposing these unacceptable conditions on us. Iceland needs to put forward a more realistic proposal. At the end of the day, no one wants to see overfishing or the collapse of mackerel stocks, which would be damaging for all sides. I urge Iceland to be more responsible and flexible in negotiations and to display greater transparency in discussions.
(PL) Mr President, I would like to congratulate Iceland very sincerely on gaining candidate country status. According to the Commission statement, Iceland's preparations to meet European Union requirements are generally good and on schedule. It should not be forgotten, however, that one condition for the accession of any country to the European Union is the clear commitment of both government and society. Therefore, I think an effective strategy for informing society is of key significance for gaining the support of society for Iceland's membership of the European Union. Poland's experience shows that a significant role may be played here not only by a broad range of government measures, but also by national media, local non-governmental organisations and international cooperation at regional and local level.
(RO) Mr President, as I also observed during the European Parliament delegation's official visit last year, of which I was a member, Iceland has made huge investments in education and research and development. I congratulate the Icelandic authorities for the support given to the Lisbon strategy and their involvement in it, including through the adoption of an Iceland 2020 strategy, which highlights the importance of these areas and outlines targets for the years ahead.
I think that accession to the European Union will entail benefits for all the parties involved. Iceland will gain economic and monetary stability, while the European Union will become more powerful in the Arctic region and in areas such as renewable energy and climate change.
I firmly believe that improving dialogue with civil society and also between the European Union and Iceland is of paramount importance. My simple recommendation to the Icelandic people is for them to wait for the final outcome of the negotiations before adopting a stance.
(FI) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we can actually congratulate ourselves. The willingness of the Icelanders to join us shows that the EU is still an attractive prospect. The stability, prosperity and security that result from European integration have been so successfully achieved that a country with such a high standard of living as Iceland is willing to join us. Of course, Iceland's economic crisis may well also have some sort of role in all this.
Iceland's membership of the EU, however, may not be a matter of course. Have we considered adequately what Iceland's added value would be for Europe? Iceland has already, in practice, outsourced its legislation to Brussels and its defence forces to NATO. It would be the smallest country in the EU in terms of population.
On the other hand, it is perhaps an irony that, compared to earlier enlargements, Iceland, as a wealthy and cherished applicant country, would actually meet the conditions set for EU membership. I am hoping for active and completely open discussions on Iceland's membership of the EU.
(SK) Mr President, it is necessary to take account of many aspects when evaluating the report on the progress of Iceland. Iceland is a fully functioning democracy and a country which fulfils all the expected standards on human rights. Iceland is part of the European Free Trade Area, and is therefore compatible with the acquis in many of the areas covered by this agenda. In comparison with other candidate countries, this puts Iceland ahead of the competition.
Despite the fact that Iceland has a functioning market economy, one of its biggest problems is the crisis in the financial sector. The divided banking sector and public debt amounting to 90% of GDP are alarming. The situation may be improving, but only very slowly. Reduced inflation is a positive development, in my opinion, but, at the same time, there is rising unemployment.
I welcome Iceland's decision reinforcing the independence of the judiciary in relation to the replacement of judges. I personally consider the progress made by Iceland in the area of education and culture to be a huge success. Standards are very high compared to the EU, thanks to which the country is participating in the Youth in Action and Erasmus Mundus lifelong learning programmes I also agree with the Commission's conclusions that Iceland is a stable democracy with strong institutions.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, today's discussion has proved productive in identifying the steps Iceland needs to take in order to ensure a positive outcome in the accession negotiations.
As acknowledged in the draft resolution we discussed today, and in the Commission progress report of last November, Iceland is at an advanced stage of meeting membership obligations and has achieved a great deal, but it needs to deliver more on a number of well-defined issues.
Some of you have mentioned mackerel. While this issue relates primarily to the management, by the coastal states concerned, of the mackerel stock in the north-east Atlantic, let me say this: we are disappointed at the lack of progress in the latest consultations. Substantial differences of opinion between the parties remain - particularly between the European Union and Norway, on the one hand, and the Faroe Islands and Iceland, on the other - with regard to their respective shares. The sustainability of this resource is important for our fishing industry, and the Commission will continue to explore all possible avenues in order to find a balanced solution for the mackerel stock, in cooperation with the coastal states.
Iceland is now entering a decisive stage in which the pace of progress towards EU membership depends on its own determination. I am positive that, with our joint support and, most importantly, with the involvement and support of its people, Iceland is capable of making real progress in the direction of the European Union.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for this debate. You have pointed out quite a number of issues, which I am convinced the Council will address appropriately during the accession negotiations, and we will be able to pay the utmost attention to their settlement. I would like to inform you that I am planning to attend the Iceland-EU Association Council meeting at the end of April, and I trust that we will receive first hand information from the Icelandic authorities regarding these matters. There has never been one second of doubt that it is agriculture, but especially fisheries, or the Icesave case, where the situation is the most difficult. However, I trust that the Commission will handle these issues in a very transparent manner.
The Members will also be appropriately informed about these issues at all times over the course of the accession negotiations. Finally, I would like to add one more thought: I am very pleased that, during the debate, no speaker questioned the fact that Iceland has a perfectly functional democratic institutional system and political culture - we all recognised this. And I am certain that the Icelandic people will make a very responsible decision about whether or not to join the European Union. Let us trust them with this; this is their task. Our task is to enable their accession, and should they decide on it, we will welcome them accordingly. Thank you very much, Mr President.
To wind up the debate, I have received a motion for a resolution tabled in accordance with Rule 110(2) of the Rules of Procedure.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place tomorrow at 12:00.
Written statements (Rule 149)
Iceland has not seriously considered full membership of the EU since the beginning of European integration, applying for accession in 2009, following a financial collapse. Despite this, the country has managed to achieve European standards and, in many areas, to fulfil the set conditions necessary for successful integration into the current 27 countries of the EU. Membership of the European Economic Area and the Schengen Area has contributed substantially to this progress. Although Iceland has managed to implement a considerable part of European legislation, the actual accession procedure may be complicated by, for example, economic policy or the policy on fishing. This represents half of Iceland's exports, accounting for 10% of its GDP. The as yet unsettled dispute between Iceland and the Netherlands and Great Britain may be viewed as another possible obstacle to Icelandic membership. The parties involved continue to look for an appropriate way to compensate Dutch and British citizens who lost their savings through the collapse of Icelandic banks. The fact that a considerable proportion of Icelandic citizens do not much favour EU membership may also be regarded as a negative factor to some extent, despite the considerable support from the population for the accession talks. It might therefore be appropriate for the Icelandic Government to initiate steps to inform the citizens as to what membership in European institutions would mean for the country, and the resulting benefits in the everyday lives of the population.
As we know, Iceland began accession negotiations in July 2010. From the outset, Iceland has been in a privileged position because of its membership in the European Economic Area. Iceland's progress on the road to EU membership is evident. The prospect of accession is being seen in a positive light, but there are still some disputed matters, such as whaling, which is banned in the EU, Iceland's desire to protect its fisheries and agriculture markets and the dispute over Icesave. Further progress is essential, mainly in the areas of fisheries, agriculture and rural development. It is important to reach agreement on the question of fishing quotas. We should emphasise the necessity of bringing Iceland's fisheries legislation into line with the principles of the EU internal market. Let us not forget that Iceland is a country in which the economy is, to a great extent, based on fisheries. Therefore, following Iceland's accession to the EU, it would want to retain a certain degree of control over the management of fisheries in its own exclusive economic zone. We should also give attention to the serious differences on the question of whaling. The ban on whaling is part of the body of EU law, which every new Member State has to accept. Worthy of note are the recent results of public opinion polls, which showed a rise in the support of society for continuing the accession negotiations and increased trust in the European Parliament.
The prospect of Iceland's accession has been well received. However, contentious issues still exist, such as whaling, which is banned in the European Union, and Iceland's wish to protect its fisheries markets. I do not think we can make any allowances in the case of whaling. Regardless of historical factors, we cannot allow a situation in which a country applying for EU membership intends to catch these rare and protected animals.
Standards which were adopted and came into force in the European Community after many years of work cannot be 'bent' to fit a brutal reality for reasons of tradition. Another question is the dispute over the size of mackerel catches. As you know, despite appeals to observe the principles of responsible fishing, in 2010, the government in Reykjavik unilaterally established a total allowable catch for the species which was much higher than the limits put forward in scientific advice. Iceland has not demonstrated the necessary openness and flexibility to achieve a compromise on this matter. Furthermore, Iceland has announced that it will introduce catch limits for 2011 of 146 000 tonnes. Such an approach fills me with fear when I think of future cooperation with Iceland on fisheries. We all realise that this conflict jeopardises the accession negotiations with Iceland. However, I personally think that in both cases, we should not agree to any concessions and should enforce compliance with the standards set by the Union in the fisheries sector.


25. Social services of general interest (


3. Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and the Office (
Madam President, I asked that we also be able to vote on the compromise, as it has a broader scope than Amendment 46 alone. You decided not to put this compromise to the vote without giving us any explanation and without giving any reply to the rapporteur. I wanted you to be aware of this and to tell you that I regret that our recommendation has not been followed, just like the rapporteur's recommendation on our House's vote.
I would also like to say - to explain the vote that has just taken place - that when any part of the entire compromise is not adopted, it is the whole package that is subject to conciliation. That is the consequence of the vote that is being taken today.
Thank you, Mrs Trautmann, I think the House understands the consequences of what it has done, but I thank you, nevertheless, for pointing that out. It would not have been appropriate to take the other compromise and, indeed, the vote was more than clear.


4. Common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (
- After the vote on Amendment 74:
(PL) I should like to draw your attention to the fact that some Members on the left of the Chamber are displaying banners. We were informed this morning that holding up banners on the right of the Chamber contravened our procedures.
In principle, anything that does not directly disrupt our work does not have to be banned, but if the House thinks that these placards are disrupting the work... Well, I do not think that there is a majority that considers itself to be disrupted. We shall therefore continue.


10th anniversary of UN Security Council resolution 1325 on women and peace and security (debate)
The next item is the statements by the Council and the Commission concerning the 10th anniversary of the adoption of UN Security Council resolution 1325 on women and peace and security.
I would like to welcome to the Chamber the representative of the Council and the representative of the Commission.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I have the honour of taking the floor in this debate on behalf of Baroness Ashton, Vice-President of the Commission and High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.
Allow me, first of all, Mr President, to thank the European Parliament for its continued interest in the topic of women, peace and security, and to point out - although you obviously know this - that Parliament was the first institution, just one month after the adoption of resolution 1325, to call for its implementation by means of a resolution within this institution.
Ten years later, we can conclude that progress has been made. We now have a significantly enhanced international framework, in particular, thanks to the adoption, in 2009, of resolutions 1888 and 1889. The appointment of the first United Nations Special Representative on violence against women in armed conflicts was an important step.
What is more, there are currently more than 20 national plans throughout the world. However, the situation persists, and the reality is that the protection of women in conflict situations and their participation in peacekeeping and reconstruction processes still fall short of the pledges made and of the needs on the ground. Violence, and particularly sexual violence, against women and girls in conflicts continues to destroy many lives and, all too often, with complete impunity.
The European Union is firmly committed to implementing resolution 1325 and subsequent resolutions. Today, we have a sound EU policy on women, peace and security, covering all aspects of the Union's external relations, from crisis management up to and including humanitarian aid and development cooperation. I should like to mention here a few specific achievements: one of the actions entails exchanging good practices.
To this end, experts from the EU institutions and the Member States regularly participate in a task force. This process has led to an increase in the number of programmes at national level. 10 Member States now have a national action plan and two other plans are being drafted. The European Union has a series of programmes designed to meet the needs of women and girls in conflict and post-conflict situations, such as the funding of medical care for victims of sexual violence.
In less than two years, this programme has funded projects in 67 countries, with over EUR 300 million provided in total. The European Union has started using a gender tracker to track gender mainstreaming in development cooperation programmes. It has gender advisers and gender focal points in each of its 13 common security and defence policy (CSDP) missions, as well as gender focal points in more than 80 EU delegations.
We are currently finalising a report in which conclusions are drawn from the integration of gender and human rights issues in common security and defence policy. The European Union is also working closely with civil society in order to promote the participation of women in the areas of peace and security.
In 2011, we plan to launch some specific projects to support women's networks in crisis-affected countries, with an estimated budget of EUR 2 million. Several EU delegations have organised Open Door days to mark the 10th anniversary of resolution 1325 and to meet local women's groups, such as those in Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Iraq, for example.
In mid-October, the European Union and the African Union organised a seminar for civil society in Addis Ababa, with a view to making recommendations for joint European Union-African Union actions.
Furthermore, as regards renewed and measurable commitments, we plan to develop, by the end of the year, some standard training elements on gender, human rights and children's rights which will be used to train the personnel of CSDP missions; to develop, by 2013, local strategies to implement resolution 1325 in development cooperation in at least 60% of conflict and post-conflict countries; and, lastly, to report regularly on the implementation of the EU's women, peace and security commitments, by using the 17 indicators that were adopted in July 2010. The first report is being finalised as we speak.
On 26 October, the European Union took part in a debate at the Security Council to mark the 10th anniversary of resolution 1325. The Belgian Presidency had previously organised three ministerial, high-level and expert meetings in Brussels, New York and Geneva in order to raise awareness and make recommendations.
The European Union has accordingly made strong calls for increased international monitoring of resolution 1325, in particular by emphasising all the indicators developed by the Secretary-General. The European Union therefore now calls for the swift, operational implementation of those indicators.
Mr President, thank you very much to the Belgian President-in-Office of the Council for his words on this subject. The Commission fully supports what the representative of the Council has just said, and I would like to add three specific points.
Firstly, I would like to say that I entirely agree with what the President-in-Office of the Council said: there is clear progress, with more than 20 national action plans established worldwide, as well as the appointment of the first United Nations Special Representative for violence against women in armed conflicts.
The second point I would like to make to all of you is that the Commission believes that more work needs to be done on preventing violence against women and girls in conflicts and, in particular, against sexual and gender violence, something which continues to happen and which is destroying many lives.
Thirdly, the European Union must set an example by applying resolution 1325 and the resolutions implementing it.
We need to continue to pay attention to the needs of women and children affected by armed conflicts, and also in post-conflict situations, through programmes financing, for example, the provision of medical services for the survivors of sexual and gender violence, by working alongside civil society to promote the participation of women in building peace and security and, of course, by working closely with the United Nations on drawing up the indicators that the Secretariat-General has developed.
The European Union must also take other steps; for example, the Vice-President of the Commission and High Representative, Baroness Ashton, has appointed the first female EU Special Representative for Sudan, Dame Rosalind Marsden.
Mr President, the adoption of resolution 1325 by the UN Security Council ten years ago obviously represented an historical step on the part of the international community, taken in the wake of the tragic experience of the Yugoslav Wars. Wars take their greatest toll on the innocent civilians, and in times of armed conflicts, civilians largely consist of women. Our experience has shown that armed conflicts have thus far been accompanied by the rape of women, and it is no coincidence that the Geneva Convention also acknowledges that this often amounts to genocide.
Even after the conflicts, stigmatisation and the consequences of violation continue to devastate the lives of the victims, as the scars left by physical and psychological abuse remain for life - if the victim ever recovers from them at all. It is therefore no overstatement to request that the prevention of violence against women become an integral part of public safety and defence policy, and that there be means by which acts of violence committed against civilians can be brought to an end. The efforts made by the UN in this regard can obviously not remain without appropriate response, as even today, women are being raped in their thousands in war zones, and are then cast out by their families, thus becoming double victims.
Recently, over 8 000 women were raped in eastern Congo within a span of five days, but there is also the issue of refugee camps, such as Camp Ashraf, where women are not safe to this day. It is also justified to request an increase in the participation of women in peacekeeping forces, as the presence of women under these specific circumstances is of extreme importance. We believe that it is important for women to play a more active part in peace processes. We cannot allow them to simply be passive participants or even victims of such processes. I am pleased to note that the Commission has taken serious steps in this respect.
Mr President, it is 10 years since UN Security Council resolution 1325 on women, peace and security was adopted. It is an important anniversary, more topical than ever, because women, like children, are still the biggest victims of war.
The thousands of cases of rape in war zones prove that rape and sexual abuse are systematically used as a weapon of war to humiliate and demoralise the opponent. In numerous cases, soldiers, guided by their superiors, systematically commit rape which, if committed in public, inflicts an even greater injury on the opposing side. The victims of these practices, generally women, are stigmatised, rejected or even murdered by their own community in an effort to restore honour.
We must all pull together in this fight. This disgrace to humanity, these war crimes, must stop. At the same time, we must increase controls everywhere, including by the blue berets, because we have a great deal of direct and indirect responsibility. Strict sanctions need to be imposed on everyone involved in such practices. Training, controls, discipline and a clear message are needed. Finally, we need to show the international community that we mean what we say.
As resolution 1325 states, women can and must participate equally in the promotion of peace and security. Our common objective must be to put women in a stronger position, with the facility to take recourse to the international courts, with programmes for their economic, social and mental reintegration. Their emancipation and protection are the sine qua non in putting a stop to the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war.
Mr President, exactly 10 years ago, women's rights as a fundamental element of human rights first became a topic for discussion by the UN Security Council following a call for gender equality in conflict and crisis situations. This was a milestone on the road to the introduction of a mandatory requirement under international law for the participation of women at decision-making levels in peace processes and security policy.
The Secretary General at the time, Kofi Annan, made an urgent call in 2005 for national action plans to be drawn up for the implementation of resolution 1325. We have already heard that only 20 states have so far done this, including European countries such as Sweden and Great Britain, but also African countries, for example, Liberia and the Côte d'Ivoire. I believe that all the EU Member States should adopt action plans of this kind. This also applies to countries such as Germany, where I come from, which has so far refused to compile an action plan.
The gender perspective has definitely become more important at an international level. A new UN Special Representative on Sexual Violence has been appointed and the UN Entity for Gender Equality has been established. However, we must be aware that all of these measures are very much in their early stages. This is about providing support for women and girls who have been the victims of sexual violence. We must intensify the resolutions and the aid programmes that are already in place. However, this is also about support for identifying and prosecuting the offenders, which must always be linked to the reform of local judicial systems.
Mr Chastel's message on behalf of Baroness Ashton concerning the provision of EUR 2 million to support this resolution is a very positive one. I would like to make it clear how important it is to involve local women's rights NGOs, so that the money goes to where it is really needed.
Mr President, women and children are victims in wars and conflict situations. Violence, rape, torture and sexual assaults are weapons that are used against women and children in these situations. Women have now been recognised as victims, and indeed they are victims. They have been recognised, among other things, as a result of the appointment of Margot Wallström to the post of UN Special Representative.
However, women are not just victims; they are important players in peace and security work for the prevention of conflicts. Their participation in the work to establish peace and democracy following wars and conflicts is essential. They play an active part in the reconstruction of the countries. Despite the fact that it is ten years since the adoption of the UN resolution, women are still only recognised as victims of violence. They are ignored in connection with the important reconstruction work for establishing peace and democracy. Despite the fact that we now know what an important part women play in this work, it is still the men who have all the influence over the decisions. It is time that we recognised the capability of women, including in connection with the peace and security work. The EU must demand that the gender perspective is taken into account when providing assistance and subsidies for reconstruction work.
Madam President, UN Security Council resolution 1325 on women, peace and security is one of the latest serious documents in which all of the nations of the world declare their respect and reverence for the fairer sex.
Every provision of the resolution has its own profound sense, and responds to problems which life often brings in relationships between men and women, when women and children frequently become the victims of force, unbridled violence and injustice in crisis situations. The advanced civilised countries subscribe to their commitments arising from UN Security Council resolution 1325 and strive, through various measures, to create the greatest possible space for applying these in national and international institutions involved in conflict resolution and the organisation of peace processes.
However, serious problems persist over respect for the human rights of women and children in many countries in the developing world, especially in central Africa and several parts of Asia. The actions of barbaric military regimes are based on a different scale of values than the one recognised by the civilised world, and the human dignity of civilians, women and children means nothing to bands of murderers.
In my opinion, this is an area we should look at and focus greater attention on as soon as possible. It is therefore also necessary to take measures in EU policy to exert greater and more intensive pressure on those regimes which do not respect the basic human rights of their citizens and inhabitants.
(HU) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that all of us could easily answer the question as to which major group of people is essentially excluded from decision making, or is only minimally involved in it, while, at the same time, having to bear the consequences of political, economic and financial decisions to a very large extent. Yes, fellow Members, I am referring to women, and not only in connection with armed conflicts, which is the topic of today's sitting, but also in connection with the economy, because it is, after all, women who must put food on their families' tables, and it is women who suffer through poverty, together with their children, to an especially significant degree. To me, this is the core message of this UN declaration - that women should be given considerably greater opportunities in decision making, so that they can become shapers, rather than victims, of their fates.
In what ways do armed conflicts affect women? Let us look at the example of Gaza. Even now, it is women who are nursing and tending to those injured as a result of the brutality of the State of Israel, it is women who nurse and tend to the children who have become disabled as a consequence, and it is women who suffer significantly from the effects of the bombing and destruction of infrastructure, the bombardment of roads and schools. We should keep this in mind when we take account of the torments women have to endure in armed conflicts.
(FR) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, in conflict areas, the use of violence against women is a deliberate tactic. Rape is a widespread, systematic and organised practice. It is a weapon of war. We must, of course, condemn this violence.
Condemnation aside, however, we must go beyond mere declarations, otherwise they just become a mantra. We must find ways to act. That is why, ladies and gentlemen, I am asking you to consider three courses of action.
The first course of action: I believe we should be convinced of the need for the European Union to promote local women's organisations in all those conflict situations in which it intervenes. Respect for the basic principles of freedom and justice will increase if it can be founded on women. Wherever women are granted rights in the world, respect for human dignity and the values of equality and fraternity - which are EU values - will be promoted.
The second course of action: when we Europeans contribute aid to help rebuild countries, I believe we should consider making it a requirement for governing powers and local authorities on the ground - which we help - to introduce quotas to ensure the participation of women at decision-making levels. I am thinking, for example, of the Palestinian Authority, which we help, which is funded almost entirely by us. The situation in the Middle East could only benefit if we demanded that the Palestinian Authority introduce quotas allowing for women to hold positions of political responsibility.
Lastly, the third course of action: wherever we intervene, by civilian, police or military means, I believe we must undertake to give women a significant and appropriate role within our own troops and operational delegations. This will only serve to make us more effective and, as many reports suggest, it will probably mean that populations are more willing to accept us.
(FR) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, it has now been 10 years since the United Nations Security Council adopted, for the first time in its history, a resolution highlighting the specific situation of women living in combat areas and their role in resolving conflicts. However, today, 10 years on from that resolution, thousands of women are still being raped in war-torn countries, such as Congo for example. I myself have strongly criticised the impunity enjoyed for many years by the perpetrators of these atrocities.
What is more, these barbaric acts are committed even though United Nations forces are sometimes, or even often, present on the ground. I believe that we are sorely lacking in political ambition and adequate funds. In particular, I would emphasise the need to train the field-based personnel of European and international organisations and to raise awareness among the suffering populations.
We have to make everyone understand that taking gender considerations into account will lead to improvements in all areas. We must put an end to the impunity too often enjoyed by those who commit violence against women, and we must establish a proper complaints procedure in this regard. We must also increase the financial resources available within the European institutions for work on gender and human rights issues, in particular, so as to implement mechanisms and assess the progress made by the European Union.
I note that, as Mr Chastel said, efforts have indeed been made, in particular, through the exchange of best practice and participation in a task force. Moreover, 10 Member States now have a national action plan. I hope that the 17 other Member States will soon have one of their own.
Lastly, I would point out that I have high hopes for the future External Action Service. I hope that women and men will participate in it equally, in particular, on the ground. We must never forget the important role women play in resolving conflicts or the need to establish communication that is based on trust between the forces of international institutions and local populations.
(PT) Madam President, highlighting the effect of wars and conflicts on women and children is of the utmost importance at a time as critical as this, when wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are dragging on, severe conflicts are being fuelled, such as in the Israeli-occupied territories of Palestine, or the Western Sahara occupied by Morocco, inequalities are increasing, poverty is being exacerbated by neoliberal policies, and new threats are arising, as happened this weekend in Lisbon with the NATO summit and the adoption of its new strategic concept. In response to this, a peaceful demonstration took place last Saturday in the streets of Lisbon, organised by the 'Yes to peace, no to NATO' campaign, which includes more than 100 organisations. Tens of thousands of people, men and women, marched calling for peace and social justice, which is essential for security, and shouting and demanding the dissolution of NATO, nuclear disarmament and respect for people's rights in the defence of peace.
In the general strike which is to take place in Portugal tomorrow, men and women will again protest against anti-social policies. These affect everyone, but they are particularly discriminatory towards women. The protesters will demand new policies which respect the dignity of workers and promote development and social progress, a prerequisite for peace.
(SK) Madam President, I, too, would like to emphasise the historical importance of Security Council resolution 1325 for peace and for security policy. It was the first time that the UN emphasised the importance of the protection of women and their full involvement in creating peace, maintaining peace and preventing conflicts.
It must be said that great efforts have been made over the past 10 years to achieve this aim. However, abuse of women is often still a major characteristic of conflicts. What is more, there has been an alarming increase in frequent and systematic violence against women both during and after conflicts.
I will not give any concrete figures, but it is surely worth mentioning the horrific events that have taken place in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Darfur, Rwanda, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Bosnia. I have personally met and spoken with women who were victims of violence during the war in the former Yugoslavia. Their stories are horrific. They were raped, tortured and humiliated. Many were ostracised even after the conflict was over.
So not even the cessation of conflict will guarantee an end to violence against women. We should always bear this in mind.
Protection of women and enabling their participation in the creation of peace and security is the main aim of resolution 1325. Unfortunately, this has yet to happen in many cases. I firmly believe there is a real chance that we can change things. However, the political will of all is required if we are to create the actual conditions. In fulfilling this task, I also see the opportunity for a positive contribution from High Representative Baroness Ashton and the European External Action Service, which could greatly strengthen the role of the EU in implementing this important resolution.
(DE) Madam President, women and children continue to be disproportionately hard hit by wars and their consequences. However, women's rights must not be misused in order to give legitimacy to military interventions. The example of the Republic of Congo shows that military measures do not help to protect, secure or establish women's rights. Unfortunately, exactly the opposite is true. The situation of women in Afghanistan today is worse than ever as a result of the war. The promise made in resolution 1325 can only really be honoured by avoiding conflict and taking only civil measures in war and conflict situations. Therefore, I believe that it is completely unacceptable to distort this resolution with the aim of increasing the number of women involved in warfare. I am calling for the EU to stop providing support on principle, including aid for equipment and training, to regimes and military forces which send child soldiers into armed conflicts, violate human rights or commit systematic acts of sexual violence.
(PT) Madam President, the resolutions of the Security Council and plans for supporting development have already been mentioned, with emphasis on the advances that have been made, but the fact is that women continue to be the main victims of armed conflicts. They are victims, yet not decision makers. Women should participate in the entire process of preventing and resolving conflicts. If there were more women in senior positions of policy making, including economic decision making, there would certainly be more peace and security in the world, and we would all benefit from greater development and better living conditions. That is why we also need more women involved in decision making at all levels. As has already been said here, women should participate and be players throughout this process; it should not be conducted only by men.
Madam President, when speaking about women in conflict zones, we have to consider that despite increased efforts and good signs, such as the appointment of former Commissioner Margot Wallström to the office of special representative of the UN Secretary-General on sexual violence in conflict, as well as the recent creation of 'UN Women', there is still a need for further action, greater awareness and practical political actions in this field.
I would strongly highlight the fact that partnerships between parliamentarians, EU and UN Member State governments, institutions and civil society are vital for building support for the agreed goals and objectives of the action programme of the international conference on population and development as regards the Millennium Development Goals.
In the context of gender equality, we have to make a joint commitment to pushing this issue forward, ensuring better representation of women in an effort to prevent war, restore peace and cope with post-conflict situations, taking into account that women can play a significant role in peacekeeping if they are properly supported and genuinely included.
In conclusion, I would like to point out that the EU has a crucial role to play in advancing these objectives to achieve an equitable and lasting solution. It is our primary responsibility and important political role to work together to address the situation of women in conflict zones by means of preventing war and maintaining international peace and security.
Madam President, I want to give my support to resolution 1325. I turn the House's attention to the situation in Northern Ireland, where we have a very active women's sector - a sector that has been a force for good within the country.
Before coming to this House, I represented West Belfast in the Northern Ireland Assembly and the Shankill area of Belfast in local government. These are areas that have been ravaged by over 30 years of violence inflicted through a terrorist campaign by Irish Republicans and intra-community violence.
Throughout that time, groups like the Women's Centre have been a cohesive force, enhancing community capacity and forging links with other women's groups in other communities. They are ordinary women who have proved themselves to be leaders and an excellent role model for other countries and communities that find themselves faced with terrorism and violence.
Today, groups like the Shankill Women's Centre, the Foyle Women's Network and Training for Women are not only forging the way ahead in community relations in Northern Ireland, but are also giving women opportunities in the labour market through education and training. This is the way forward, colleagues.
(RO) Madam President, I hope that this debate which we are having today will not only be an occasion for marking the anniversary of resolution 1325, but also a new beginning and new approach to this issue, which persists virtually in the same forms that led to the adoption of resolution 1325.
I do not believe that declarations are enough, especially declarations which convey a different picture of reality. I believe that action is needed and it is the European Union's task, as part of the current security policy, to create an initial code of conduct to be used in both conflicts and post-conflict operations, although we have a convention, in the form of the Geneva Convention, which condemns violent conduct during conflicts. I believe that a code of conduct of this kind would provide added value for the European Union, marking a step towards resolving this issue.
The other aspects of involvement must undoubtedly be supported by consistent financial assistance based on a strategy for our development projects.
(SK) Madam President, we are marking the 10th anniversary of UN resolution 1325, and there are almost daily reports of other resolutions and declarations aiming to help women. However, I have my doubts as to whether we are monitoring their fulfilment sufficiently.
More and more documents are being produced, but the situation of women is improving only very slowly. It is our duty to work for compliance with and the protection of the rights of all women, so that they can be fully integrated into society, regardless of their situation, origin or status.
Their role begins in the family, not only because they are irreplaceable in raising children to respect human dignity for all, but there are also women who, aware of a threat to their families, get involved in preventing and solving military conflicts. However, until women feel safe in their families and in their countries, it is impossible to talk about peace, and not only in countries where there is no war.
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I clearly agree with Parliament on a very large number of points. How could I fail to agree in particular with Mr Juvin's and Mr Tarabella's calls for the creation of the European External Action Service to represent a major opportunity to strengthen EU policy on women, peace and security? During the process of establishing the service, the ongoing challenge of ensuring greater representation of women at every level, including within personnel units, and especially at the highest level, must be recognised.
Baroness Ashton is very clearly working on this. She has taken some steps in this direction, for example, by appointing Rosalind Marsden as the EU's first female Special Representative to Sudan. In September, she appointed 29 people to senior positions within the delegations, including seven female heads of delegation, which is nothing short of a 50% increase in the number of women at this level.
At the same time as the EU undertakes major efforts to strengthen its capabilities in relation to the participation of women, peace and security, we believe that it is also important to take steps to raise awareness within other organisations and countries. This goes hand in hand with specific training activities. Many of you have spoken on this issue too. Within the framework of the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights, the Union supports the United Nations in the implementation of resolutions on women, peace and security in countries and regions that are particularly affected, such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and the Fergana Valley, which spans Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.
Lastly, the European Union continues to believe in the importance of increased delegation of responsibilities at international level. The Union believes that the Security Council should establish a working group to examine the progress made in implementing resolution 1325 and to make recommendations to the Council in order to meet the challenges and remedy the shortcomings that exist and to speed up the implementation of that resolution.
The Union has therefore called on the Security Council to redouble its efforts in the fight against impunity. Targeted and progressive measures should be imposed against any party to a conflict that is responsible for serious violations of women's rights.
I am convinced that the European Parliament will continue to support the efforts made by the Union and the Member States in this area.
I have received six motions for a resolution from the various political groups on this subject.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Thursday, 25 November, at 12:00.
Written statements (Rule 149)
All the assertive efforts undertaken - the resolutions and national and international plans for improving the level of protection for women in conflict zones - have failed to eliminate this barbaric weapon which is frequently resorted to in modern warfare: sexual violence. On the contrary, impunity provides conditions conducive to the spread of this practice which is diametrically opposed to our values. I have repeatedly spoken out, along with others, against the acts of mass rape perpetrated in the Congo, Liberia and other conflict zones, especially in Africa. The thousands of women falling victim to sexual abuse and violence are also being condemned to bear in the future the social stigma and burden of terrible diseases, such as HIV.
The International Day against Violence against Women, which we mark on 25 November, must also remind us that women are victims of domestic violence, which is occurring with alarming frequency, marital rape, sexual harassment and human trafficking. Gender-related violence, whether committed in the home or armed conflict zones, is one of the most serious human rights violations and must be opposed and punished accordingly.
Over the years, the traditional role of peace missions has changed. It is now not only monitoring ceasefire agreements or ensuring that borders between states are respected. Currently, missions are engaged in a range of 'soft' activities - promoting human rights and democracy in a wide variety of ways, supporting the organisation of elections and restoring the rule of law. On the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the adoption of resolution 1325, attention should be drawn to the particular role of women in these processes. In many cases, they are far better predisposed to carrying out the tasks of peace missions. Among other things, I am thinking, here, of work with the victims of sexually motivated violence and violence based on sexual discrimination. Women work in women's prisons, they help with social reintegration and they also conduct numerous forms of training. We talk a lot about increasing the participation of women in politics and business. In none of these areas has it yet been possible to achieve full equality of opportunities. This is why it is necessary to return to these issues and look carefully at the way in which legislation which has been adopted is brought into force, so that on the 15th or 20th anniversary of the adoption of resolution 1325, it will be possible to say that all of its provisions have been implemented.


7. Rights of passengers in bus and coach transport (
Regarding Amendments 81 and 12:
(DE) Mr President, I believe that we had a large majority for Amendment 81, with the result that Amendment 12 lapses. Can you just confirm that again, please?
Yes, you are correct Mr Jarzembowski: Amendment 12 falls.
(DE) Mr President, this second amendment can absolutely be viewed as complementary. There is no contradiction. The two amendments do not preclude one another.
(Uproar in the Chamber)
Could the rapporteur, Mr Albertini, give us his opinion?
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I agree with what our coordinator, Mr Jarzembowski, said: Amendment 12 falls.


Composition of committees and delegations: see Minutes


Texts of agreements forwarded by the Council: see Minutes


9. Accession of Romania (vote)