Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-28-Speech-3-150"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010228.8.3-150"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, let me begin by saying that it is in itself a good thing that the rapporteur should focus attention on the problem of the consequences of globalisation for female immigrants. However, I have some misgivings, because what is the purpose of this report? The previous speaker made this point. Does it contribute to the finding of work, and if so, how? The problems are certainly not limited to women from Mediterranean countries. Women from other parts of the world often have to contend with the same problems. In addition, it is not the case that the European Parliament has not concerned itself with these problems before. I think, for example, of the reports on trafficking in women and the communication from the Commission on a Community-wide immigration policy, which will shortly be discussed in various committees in the European Parliament.
My group therefore considers that this report is, in fact, too immature and too superficial to provide a substantial contribution to the discussion. There are also a number of shortcomings in this report. I shall mention a few.
Naturally we agree with gender mainstreaming in this field, but I have problems with the text: in Section 15, the Dutch version speaks of the “channelling of migratory flows to Europe”, while the English text refers to “quotas of migratory flows”. Channelling migratory flows is just about acceptable to my group, but the introduction of quotas is definitely not.
A second point. Internally the European Union has still not solved the problem of the recognition of each other’s national professional qualifications and titles. That is, of course, crucial to this problem group, which is why, during the discussion in the Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities, the Liberals invited Member States – also in the context of immigration from Mediterranean countries (and, in fact, from all countries) – to recognise professional qualifications and titles. But I find the proposal contained in the report to set up, especially for immigrants, an information office on domestic services, very odd. It sounds very limited. Surely it is not just a matter of cheap domestic help?
A third point. The report talks of Euro-Mediterranean citizenship. Does such a thing exist? Will we have Euro-ACP citizenship or Euro-Mercosur citizenship? Because the European Union has entered into treaties with these countries too. And what kind of status will such a citizen have? A higher status, or a lower one? Such a measure might well lead to discrimination. And I could go on.
My group therefore concludes that while it is in itself useful for the problems of women immigrants to be highlighted, this has been done previously and better. This report is too superficial, too one-sided and bears the marks of a one-sided approach to a very vulnerable group. As a result, my group finds itself obliged, despite the improvement introduced by us, to withhold its support from this report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples