Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-03-14-Speech-2-110"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060314.21.2-110"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
I have, for over 40 years, campaigned for women’s rights and for gender equality.
I cannot therefore be accused of lacking any sympathy for this matter.
I do wonder, though, why a European Institute for Gender Equality is supposed to be necessary, quite simply because the idea of a Gender Institute was hatched over ten years ago, since when a lot of time has passed and we now set different priorities for spending money, which is in short supply, in a more effective way.
I can think of better ways of spending over EUR 50 million, and thereby promoting equality of opportunity for women and men, than by creating an Institute whose functions and powers would overlap with those of many bodies at national, European and global level.
The sight of this shopping list – which is what these 85 amendments amount to – causes me to worry about the eventual costs of what will be an oversized playground for women’s libbers with outdated ideas.
I endorse the amendment that reminds us that this House has already resolved that such an institute should form part of the European Union’s Agency for Fundamental Rights. That would, at any rate, limit the damage it could do.
In view of the many things in it that make no sense, and of the absence from it of any financial perspectives, I cannot vote in favour of this report today."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples