Speeches

Madam President, this is my body. The state does not own my body. I live in, I live through, and I walk the earth with my body. I own my body. I own my ear lobes, my kidney, my organs when I die. I decide. Why should the state interfere with my uterus as the only organ of my body? What are we discussing today? It is a global debate. The protection of my human dignity. A fundamental right. My autonomy as a woman, as a citizen, is what is at stake. Pregnancy is one of the most dangerous things that a woman can endure. What we’re discussing today is our right to make our health care choices, to make our own decisions. Our pregnancies are unpredictable and decisions are for the pregnant to take. It is our pregnancies, our bodies. We are not the property of the state.

Thank you very much for mentioning the referendum on the repeal of the Eighth Amendment in Ireland. As parliamentarians and as community leaders, how can we, from this side of the Atlantic, help the community leaders and the parliamentarians in the US in their fight for abortion rights?

You mentioned Article 2 of the Treaty. In that article, there is also the right to equality. Are all of the rights mentioned in Article 2 of the Treaty not equal?

Thank you very much, Terry, for your speech, and I hope that your throat is going to feel better. In this debate, there is a lot of influence from religious communities and churches. Do you see that in such a debate as today, wearing a Christian cross around the neck when speaking is a political symbol?

Madam President! If men were to have abortions, then we were not here today, so it was a declared natural part of health care that everyone had access to. It was not a debate at all. The right to access sexual and reproductive health is not just a matter for women. It is a matter for all of us, for men and women and for all citizens of Europe. And we cannot talk about equality, we cannot talk about fundamental rights unless we also talk about the right to receive the health care that we need. One of our biggest challenges is that we don't have enough knowledge about women's health. We have medical textbooks where women's clitoris is not listed at all. There is a lack of basic knowledge. We need that when we talk about sexual and reproductive health, because that is what we are talking about today. But we are also talking about abortion, and we are talking about the legacy that we must promise from Simone Veil. And we can't talk about it without mentioning things by their name. That is why I was disappointed by the speech made this week by Roberta Metsola, the new President of the European Parliament. I am disappointed by the agreement that we have made in this House among the three largest groups, where we do not explicitly mention that we will fight for women's right to abortion. We need to lift it through the Simone Veil Pact, which will form the basis of a European alliance for women's rights. It's a battle we have to fight every day. This is linked to the fight for democracy, for equal rights, for LGBTI people and for our rule of law.

Mr President! Margrethe Vestager, Executive Vice-President, Thierry Breton, colleagues! The French philosopher Michel Foucault believed that knowledge and power are inextricably linked. If that is true – and I think it is – then we are all powerless in the digital age. Digital services and social media have left us in the dark. Every time we make a post online, buy an item or do a search, we pay. We do not pay with money, but with our data. Data that the digital platforms then stop into intricate algorithms that are often used to manipulate users. The big problem is that we don't know what the price is. We do not know what data the services take from us or how they use it. We are ignorant, and so we are powerless. With the Digital Services Act, we are taking power back to users, to citizens. We are forcing the tech giants to lay out their algorithms so that we can carry out the necessary oversight. Completely as we oversee the pharmaceutical industry and other industries. We make the internet transparent so that users are no longer left in the dark. We break the tech giants' monopoly on dialogue and freedom of speech online, so that they can no longer censor and propagandize secretly. We force them to share knowledge. We force them to share power. I am proud, as shadow rapporteur in the Committee on Legal Affairs, to bring improvements to this legislation with good colleagues. I am proud to have made clear fingerprints, especially against dark patterns. Finally, the Digital Services Act is probably the most important piece of legislation voted by the European Parliament in recent times. I am proud of our Digital Services Act.

Madam President, I would like to thank the Council for being here. I don’t actually want to be here. I think we’ve had this conversation over and over and over again during the last year and a bit, and the situation for Polish women is only getting worse. But imagine being a Polish doctor in a hospital with a woman between your hands knowing that you would be able to save her life, but that you dare not, that you dare not give her the health treatment that she needs because you’re afraid of the legal consequences, and you’re afraid of the legislation and the punishments that your government is trying to inflict on you. That is why we need to keep having this conversation here in the European Parliament – because we must defend the fundamental rights of all European citizens. This is not a question of women’s health. This is not a question of women. This is a question of the rule of law and of fundamental rights. The Polish Government is, for political, ideological reasons, attacking women first. We must, as the European Parliament, stand up for Polish women – because we cannot have our full rights and be free in all of Europe unless all women in Europe are free. Finally, where has the Commission been? Where have the Member States been? Why have we not been able to provide Polish women with the health care that they need in other European countries so that we can ensure their fundamental rights?

Madam President, women’s rights are human rights, so can we not rest assured that women in our societies and in our families have equal opportunities and rights in the European Union today? With deep regret – but probably not to the great surprise of those of you listening – the answer is ‘no’. We have not yet achieved gender equality in our Union, because our societies are still based on patriarchal structures and allow for toxic gender stereotypes, hindering gender equality, both for women and for men. Because not all Member States take the necessary measures to ensure that women have equal opportunity to employment, proper working conditions and equal pay. Because of the carelessness of Member States, when they reluctantly implement the Work-Life Balance Directive or try to turn back time on the Istanbul Convention. The results of the Gender Equality Index for the European Union in the past three years have been disappointing. However, what is truly horrifying is that we do not even know the real state of the Union – because Member States are not required to provide the necessary data, we do not have comparable EU-wide data. What we do know is that a toxic patriarchy causes gender stereotypes, which causes femicides, cyberviolence, harassment and psychological, physical and sexual violence – all of which are a widespread disease in our society. We need to follow and see the patterns; femicide and infanticide follow a pattern, and if we recognise these patterns, we can save lives. Therefore, we demand that the Member States train law enforcement to recognise the patterns of gender-based violence. We also know that even in Europe today, we see inequality between men and women every single day. Sadly, Member States have explicitly undermined women’s rights, especially the right of decision over their own bodies. This report should not be simply cast aside but used as a crucial tool to help us to act. Increasingly, women are sharing their stories, empowering others and ensuring change. We must listen to them and we must act.

Madam President, I am enjoying the fact that I’m able to take this point of order by being here physically, but I am not enjoying the fact that Member States are reinstating security measures against COVID-19. I travelled here the day after the Danish Prime Minister said that we would look into reinstating the use of the COVID pass, for example, in Denmark. At the same time, we are now sitting elbow to elbow in this room and travelling from all across Europe. I think it is worrying that we as a House are reducing restrictions and protection for ourselves and our populations, as Europe is going towards rising cases. Also, where are the lessons learned from the last year and a half? Why are we no longer using hybrid modes of working, and why are we no longer using remote voting?

Madam President, equality is a fundamental value of the European Union, and equality starts with our right to decide over our own bodies. This Parliament debated the undermining of the rule of law in Poland, at length, yesterday. Our debate today and the debate yesterday are linked. Today, we debate the decision one year ago by the unconstitutional Constitutional Tribunal, which flies in the face of the right for equality. The backlash against gender equality and equal rights for LGBTIQ are directly linked to the rule of law. Our defence of rule of law starts with the defence of minority rights and gender equality. Over the last five years, the Polish Government has abandoned the values that unite Europe. Minorities have been under attack, the rule of law has been under attack and women’s bodies have been under attack. Our democracies are in danger when minorities and women come under attack. When miners went into the coalmines, they brought along canary birds so that they could be warned when the miners were in danger. Minorities and women are the canaries in the coalmine of democracy. But are you listening? Have we heard that they’ve stopped singing? The right to abortion should not be a political battle, but the Polish Government has made it into an ideological battleground. Human rights defenders are receiving threats, harassment and intimidation from their own government, trying to silence them. Therefore, it is important to show them that they are not alone and to show the Polish Government that the rest of Europe is watching. The right to abortion has slowly but surely been stolen from Polish women. Thank you to the Member States providing supports to these Polish women. I’ll conclude by saying that the fight of Polish women for their rights is also my fight. I am not free and equal until all women in Europe are free and equal.

Mr President, Poland, like every Member State, is bound to guarantee that all its national courts are impartial and independent. We must note, however, that the Polish Constitutional Tribunal is no longer a court in the sense of a judicial body. Its decisions are more correctly to be understood as a Polish Government statement by a different channel. ‘A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.’ However, court does not become a court just by being named a court. The Constitutional Tribunal is but a political tool for the Polish Government. We saw a year ago, when it removed the right for Polish women to get the health care they need to decide over their own bodies. Why, Prime Minister, do you claim to respect the primacy of Union law without acknowledging the role of the European Court of Justice as its final arbiter? Prime Minister, why do you stand in the very House of the European Parliament while you deny its political and democratic legitimacy? I would like to conclude with one remark. The rules of the game must be the same for all. Poland is seeking to take Germany to the Court of Justice. I look forward to seeing Poland take Hungary to the European Court of Justice. Or are the rules of the game not the same for all countries?

Madam President, as a Dane I find it essential to ensure environmental protection, sustainable development and reduction of geopolitical military tensions in the Arctic. Unfortunately this Parliament has a history of overstepping our competences when it comes to the Arctic. We must not only accept but promote the voices of the people living in the Arctic to ensure that Arctic policy is made in and with the Arctic. I regret to see parallels made to Russian aggressions in other parts of Europe. This suggests that this Parliament mainly sees the Arctic as an instrument to further our own interests elsewhere. The exaggerated emphasis on geopolitical tensions is counterproductive for international cooperation in the Arctic, which is exactly what this report calls for. In fact, maritime border disputes in the Arctic have been settled peacefully. As we must promote dialogue with the people of Greenland and the Faroes Islands, I welcome the work looking forward to establish a permanent EU presence in Greenland and the Faroe Islands, in cooperation with the Danish Government. Thanks too to the members of the Foreign Affairs Committee for their successful visit to Denmark and Greenland.

Mr President, this report is especially important in light of the shadow pandemic following the COVID pandemic, where we’ve seen a massive rise in violence against women – just because they are women – across the EU. We must prevent intimate partner violence in all its forms. It’s not only a question of a black eye, a broken rib or a broken arm. Violence is often psychological before it becomes physical and it can take very insidious forms. It can also continue after the end of the relationship and we must not allow our children to be weaponised. The continued violence through custody rights and visitation rights must not be permitted, just as withholding such rights for the other parent must not be allowed to be used as a weapon. As Renew shadow on the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI), I would like to underline the importance of this right for women and children, examining the impact of intimate partner violence and custody rights on women and children. The report examines the incompatibility of shared custody and unsupervised visits in the case of intimate partner violence, owing to the severe consequences for women and children, including the risks of extreme acts of femicide and infanticide. It calls for mandatory and targeted training for judicial and law enforcement officers and the establishment of specialised courts and judicial officers within the Member States, because femicide and infanticide follow a pattern and, if we recognise this pattern, we can save lives.

Mr President, it’s not all algorithms or artificial intelligence that are problematic, but predictive profiling and risk assessment artificial intelligence and automated decision—making systems are weapons of mass destruction. They are as dangerous for our democracy as nuclear bombs are for living creatures and life. They will destroy the fundamental rights of each citizen to be equal before the law and in the eye of our authorities. It is not only a question of getting the technology good enough. We must not allow mass surveillance to strip us of our most fundamental rights as citizens, for example the right to unite in demonstrations in public spaces. Madam Commissioner, thank you for underlining the need for modern tools for our judicial authorities. But where is the legal framework that will ensure strict safeguards against misuse and strict democratic control and oversight?

Mr President, our democracies are choking. Their oxygen is being withheld. Governments across Europe have their hands on the throats of journalists, judges and civil society. We are seeing the gradual dismantling but steep decline of fundamental rights, and not only in Hungary. Today we discuss a law against LGBTI persons adopted by the Hungarian Parliament, a clear breach of EU values. But also in other countries, politicians have put their hands around the throats of minority groups and are choking them. Minorities are the canaries in the coal mine of democracy. When they are persecuted, we know our democracy is in danger. The citizens, civil society and human rights defenders of Hungary and Poland are rising up in defence of their democracy. But Commissioner, where is the Commission? Presidency, where are the sanctions from the Council? Talk is cheap. You have the tools to act. We need to see action. The European Union is a community of values, not just a common market. That is why we in the European Parliament demand action in defence of our democracy.