Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-23-Speech-1-090"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001023.8.1-090"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, no one is disputing that we should strive for greater equity between men and women. For too long, women’s role has been despised. In this respect, the Napoleonic Code, which was framed in France at the beginning of the 19th century and exported to every corner of Europe, must shoulder a large share of the blame. Women must once again be given a place that is in keeping with the vital importance of their vocation, and I am not entirely sure that Mrs Eriksson’s report makes any contribution towards this.
All the same, the texts before us are not entirely lacking in quality. So, Amendment No 2, presented by my own committee, grants single fathers the same rights as single mothers. Equality and fair treatment must work both ways, that is the ideal. I am delighted, moreover, that improvements in childcare facilities are planned in order to better support the reconciliation of professional and family life.
This report does, however, give some cause for concern. Amendment No 18, for example, which seeks to support action by candidate countries to combat discrimination must not afford any opportunity to foist on them social choices alien to their culture. In this respect, in New York, very distinct differences between the European Union and Poland emerged. By failing to respect Poland’s social choices, the European Union would be taking a very peculiar, and very disturbing, view of pluralism. Furthermore, Amendment No 19 on establishing an audit of equal opportunities within the public budget is extremely debatable. Indeed, the way the concept of discrimination has been manipulated makes it, in many respects, an empty formula used by a whole collection of sorcerer’s apprentices in order to achieve their ideological ends.
It is high time we broke with an ideological vision of woman’s place in society. In this area, as in many others, it is essential for public authorities to exercise true pluralism in selecting their associates. It is not right for a handful of women, expert in making claims of society and living on intravenous injections of public monies, to monopolise the role of speaking on behalf of women.
In this respect, I cannot but endorse the decision by the Committee on Budgets to break the monopoly held for so long by the European Women’s Lobby. I should like to see this House confirming this bold change of course. A decision of this type would be like a breath of fresh air to the strange alliances which too closely bind a number of pressure groups to the European Commission and to some political groups in this House. The women’s movement can only be strengthened by such a decision. I could go even further, and say it would be ennobled by such a decision. This is something my Group will take into consideration in its final vote."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples