Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-18-Speech-1-072"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-10-18"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding - Precarious women workers (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20101018.13.1-072"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-10-18-Speech-1-0732
lpv:speaker	lp:Anne Delvaux2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; FEMM (2010-08-30--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with South Africa (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; ENVI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Centre Démocrate Humaniste (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Pan-African Parliament (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, as I see it, the need to increase family leave is patently obvious: raising the minimum maternity leave threshold is a step forward, an advantage, and one ought not to be completely demagogic by comparing the economic impact with a qualitative advantage that is difficult to quantify. However, there are essentially two parts to the problem: the first is the economic context, that is true, but it is not reason enough to leave millions of families in the lurch for more decades to come; the second is the legal loopholes in the report, because the text includes several types of family leave with incompatible legal bases. Let us take adoption leave, which appears in the text alongside maternity and paternity leave. I personally appreciate, as an adoptive mother and on behalf of all the women I represent, the will to grant the same rights as those of biological mothers. I am, in fact, what Mrs Morin-Chartier referred to as the small additional package to be added to the Estrela report. While the aim is indeed to improve the health and rights of women – of all women – in the labour market, adoptive mothers, who have become mothers like the others, are entitled to the same rights and the same protection at work. Like the others, they are mothers in their own right, and this applies, moreover, whether the child they adopt is under 12 months old or not; we must avoid the kind of discrimination that appears in the text. On the subject of adoption, I regret the fact that the text goes into so little detail. It does not even include any of the Ramboll impact assessment findings. None of this has been dealt with very well, which is clearly a weak point. Nevertheless, despite this reservation, I shall support Mrs Estrela’s report because, economic considerations aside, not only are there men and women who must better assume their parental responsibilities in a society that is increasingly abdicating its responsibility of raising its young people, but it is also our duty to ensure that people do not have to choose to sacrifice their children for their job, or their job for their children. Lastly, we are not Members of the Council but of Parliament. If we directly elected representatives are not ambitious, then tell me: who will be?"@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph