Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-08-Speech-1-096"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040308.8.1-096"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it was in the 1990s that the great UN conferences gave new impetus to international cooperation and in particular to the relations between the poor and the wealthy countries in the world. Among them was the Cairo Conference on Population and Development, held in September 1994. Its tenth anniversary, which is almost upon us, cannot fail to be an occasion for drawing up a review of what has become of the ambitious Programme of Action, which the considerable number of 179 states voted to adopt. If I may anticipate the rest of my speech, the result is somewhat disappointing when measured against the claims made for it then. It was in Cairo that population development was first bracketed with global development and core development policy objectives, whereas population growth had formerly been dealt with as a wholly separate issue, and birth control and family planning had not been considered in relation to society as a whole.
Doing this for the first time was Cairo’s principal achievement. It chose as its primary objectives the eradication of poverty, sustainable economic growth, educational opportunities for all population groups, especially for girls and women, gender equality and equal rights for men and women, protection, support and encouragement for the family, facilitation of general access to reproductive health, family planning and sexual health services, and a reduction in infant, child and maternal mortality rates.
The Cairo Action Programme placed the right – and I emphasise the right – to reproductive health and family planning at the heart of a new understanding of population policy, and so it is on this that my report focuses. It will be clear from the appended statistics how dire is the situation of women in developing countries as regards their reproductive health and the continuing high death rates among infants, children and their mothers.
Let me give you some details of the misery of women around the world. Every year, one million women die as a result of infections of the reproductive organs, including sexually transmitted diseases, but excluding HIV/Aids. Every minute, though, ten people are infected with the HIV virus, half of them being under 24 years of age. Every minute, a woman dies as a result of complications associated with pregnancy. Every year, 175 million women become pregnant, and, of those, at least 75 million do not want to be. Every minute, some 100 pregnancies are terminated, 40 of them unsafely carried out by persons with no medical training. Every year, 70 000 women die as a result of botched terminations.
Let me say, for the avoidance of misunderstanding, that termination of pregnancy cannot, of course, be a family planning method, but if women are in dire need and have no other way out, then they must be enabled to have a safe termination. According to a well-known African doctor, ‘If as many young men were dying each day, about 1 450 per day or 529 000 per year, from causes that were largely preventable, it would be a matter for the Security Council
’ The risks involved, though, are far from equal. In developing countries, complications arising from pregnancy and birth are the main cause of death and disablement for women of child-bearing age. To put it another way, the risk of dying during pregnancy or as a result of it is 150 times greater for women south of the Sahara than it is for women in Europe. In Denmark, a woman dies for this reason every four months; in Afghanistan, it is every 26 minutes. I could give many other comparisons.
These data should throw into relief the urgent need for action across the board, to which the signatory states at Cairo committed themselves to the tune of billions. Most of them have failed to follow this commitment through; not even one-half of the sum promised has actually been produced, although the developing countries have, in percentage terms, done more to meet the targets than have the countries of the North. The United Kingdom has just given us a good example of how to do it by increasing from GBP 4.5 million to GBP 6 million its funding per annum for the UN’s family planning programme. This is also a response to President Bush’s restrictive policy, which has sparked protests around the world.
Recently too, the Commission on Population and Development of the United Nations Economic and Social Council, ECOSOC, has also come to the conclusion, looking back at Cairo, that population and reproductive health are highly important issues that must therefore form part of development programmes and strategies to combat poverty, and that this would be the only way to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. That is in line with the conclusions in my report, which are addressed to the Commission, for European development cooperation, too, must actively help every couple and every individual to avail themselves of the fundamental right to good health and the free exercise of their own responsibility in determining the number of children they will have and the age at which they will have them.
For over 90 years, the International Women’s Day has been a day of political campaigning for women’s rights. In Europe, too, there is – as we have heard – still much to be done, but we European sisters must admit that we are lamenting from something of a great height; what we have achieved, most women in developing countries can only dream of. International Women’s Day must make us more aware of the need for international solidarity. The message of my report on Cairo ten years on to the women of the South is that their European sisters are standing alongside them. Even there, the rays of hope are multiplying. Which of the world’s parliaments do you think has the highest proportion of women members? Finland’s? Sweden’s? Neither has anything to be ashamed of, but Rwanda’s, with over 48%, does better than either. This gives us grounds for hope."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples