Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-06-15-Speech-4-114"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000615.3.4-114"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Meeting in plenary session in Strasbourg, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on the results of the Special Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations entitled ‘Women 2000: gender equality, development and peace for the twenty-first century’ of 5-9 June 2000 held in New York and at which Astrid Lulling, Member of the European Parliament, participated. As co-signatory to that resolution, Mrs Lulling made the following statement in Strasbourg:
‘I have just had the opportunity of attending the special General Assembly of the United Nations called from 5 to 9 June 2000 in New York to evaluate progress since the last UN world conference on women, which took place in 1995 in Beijing, on the implementation of the Beijing Action Platform. The Assembly was attended by some ten thousand women, making it the ideal meeting place for analysing the achievements of the last five years and comparing attitudes – which are very different moreover – on the need to accelerate implementation of the Beijing Platform. Although we are not euphoric, the results of the Assembly are acceptable.
Because of certain reactions in this Parliament, both today and yesterday during the debate, from some colleagues who were not in New York – reactions obviously based on misinformation and misunderstanding – I want to make it clear that the Members of the European Parliament present in New York did not speak on behalf of this Parliament without a mandate. Actually, they were not entitled to speak, given the procedure at special General Assemblies of the UN. It is the Presidency of the European Union that speaks on behalf of the Union at that kind of international conference. So there are no grounds for putting words into the mouths of the Members of the European Parliament present in New York on mere intent.
Certainly we were active behind the scenes, if I can call it that, and we had informal but useful meetings with Members of Parliament from the Member States and the candidate countries for membership of the European Union attending as part of their national delegations.
For my own part, I contributed with my colleagues in the Group of the European People’s Party and European Democrats, to dispelling an impression which prevailed notably among certain third country delegations, that, for the women of the European Union, in terms of gender equality, sexual orientation and abortion were the absolute priorities in the 21st century.
Because people were putting words into the mouths of various parties, particularly Poland’s, I would like to specify that as regards gender equality, Poland is adopting the
and is not calling into question the provisions of Article 13 of the Treaty of Amsterdam on discrimination based on gender. But the Treaty of Amsterdam does not oblige Poland to legislate on abortion. It can be recommended to do so, but subsidiarity applies. I wanted to make that clear to dispel any misunderstanding about what really happened in New York. It is true that the militants of a certain sexual orientation – which is fortunately only a problem for a tiny minority of women in Europe and the world, and which is not mine – are much more visible, even in New York, than the millions of women who, because of their economic and social situation, have other preoccupations and priorities when it comes to gender equality.’"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples