Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-12-Speech-3-271"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030212.9.3-271"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Although the Sandbaek Report aims to improve health care in the field of sexuality and family planning in developing countries, the regulation is likely to lead to a worse situation because support for abortion is not ruled out. First, abortion is not a Community competence, being too far away from the aims of development cooperation ever to become a Community competence via that route. The second reason why abortion may not be a Community policy concerns the supplementary nature of the policy. It is not allowed to replace the policy of a Member State, which support for abortion would do, given that it is a criminal offence in one Member State and in several candidate countries.
The report also lacks clarity because it fails to define reproductive health. Does the definition of the World Health Organisation apply? This includes termination of pregnancy and therefore abortion! Amendments Nos 49 and 53 deserve strong support because they clearly rule out abortion. Moreover the organisations implementing the Community policy are not unequivocal in their efforts to reduce abortion. They actually have so-called ‘safe abortion’ as one of their objectives. However, the greatest potential for improving health is not in abortion but in a different area. The report states that 13% of maternal mortality is caused by so-called ‘unsafe abortion’, as if there was such a thing a safe abortion. This means that 87% has a different cause. Better care during pregnancy and better health care in general would therefore reduce maternal mortality considerably. The 13% caused by so-called ‘unsafe abortion’ can also be brought down, through more compassionate counselling of women with unwanted pregnancies.
Next the share of the budget taken by the report is unbalanced. The annual budget of EUR 20 million represents a doubling of what was spent last year. That will be at the expense of other budget headings. Figures from the UN population fund show that people worldwide have better access to contraceptives than to clean water. In short, we are setting the wrong priorities.
Finally, hopeful developments can be seen in several African countries in reducing sexually-transmitted diseases, due to education that emphasises fidelity in marriage and abstinence. Is the Commission aware of these positive results? I ask this question again because the Commission did not answer it during the debate on hunger, trade and the role of HIV/AIDS in that. I refer to Uganda and Zambia. In South Africa beneficial effects have also been acknowledged. Fidelity in marriage and abstinence produce better results than the present secular European morality! I eagerly await Commissioner Nielson's response."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples