Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality Ordinary meeting
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
FEMM European Parliament
Follow its sittingsPinuccia Contino
Now, naturally, when we think about this, it seems obvious. Right? We all like to be in a place where it is clear that men and women get the same salary for equal work or work of equal value. We also have studies that confirm this. Pay scale reports, for example, that employees in very transparent organizations are 65% less likely to leave their job compared to those who work in very opaque ones.
Employees in these opaque organizations are 183% more likely to leave their job than those thriving in very transparent ones. We could give you more figures, but I think what is really important is that pay transparency is not limited to the same jobs. Actually, the directive also applies to work of equal value and meaning, that this is also about work that is different in nature or that appears to be different, but in fact is worth the same. This, in principle, already exists as a legal obligation, but its application, including the context of collective agreements, was never scrutinized and checked. In practice, pay structures may still reflect gender stereotypes and social perceptions about the value of typical female or male occupations and end up being discriminatory.
The commission really remains committed to the effective implementation of the directive in accordance with the established timeline. We know this is so important for our society in Europe. The directive granted member states a transposition period of three years, which is actually one year longer than usual. The deadline, as we know, is 06/07/2026. And we are not idle.
We are providing support for member states and stakeholders to implement the directive. We held already four transposition workshops with member states covering all the directive's provisions. This way, we have really given the best possible support to the national administration and social partners to implement the directive and to facilitate the exchange of best practices existing at national level. On 24th April 2026, which is Friday next week, we will hold a workshop for social partners. This way, we aim to build the capacity of social partners.
We will present also with AGE the toolkit that is going to be presented in more detail by Elena after me, and other good practice to promote equal paying collective bargaining. And to further facilitate the implementation of the directive, the commission has also made funding available through the 2024 and 2026 service gender equality course. Projects are already ongoing in several member states to support the development of practical methodologies and digital tools at national level to assist employers with pay reporting through capacity building and training. And the latest call from the Serve project is still on. It is addressed to social partners to comply with the directive, and the deadline for application is April 28.
So we are supporting employers' gender-neutral job evaluation and classification because we know that it's challenging. So we know it's not easy, but it's feasible. The directive clarifies that work of equal value must be assessed through four criteria, which are based on case law: skills, efforts, responsibilities, and working conditions. The assessment can be done through gender neutral job evaluation, and that's exactly the purpose of the step by step toolkit on gender neutral job evaluation that we developed together with AGE. This toolkit is tailored to employers of varying size to facilitate the task and provide explanatory materials to support compliance with the principle of equal pay by all those who are addressed by the directive.
So I would say that now Missus Anshevska, who is the expert on the toolkit, may continue with more specific presentation.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Thank you very much. And indeed, now we'll like to welcome, missus Anshewska, that was saying before, will join us online. Thank you. Thank you very much for being here with us.
Thank you very much for the job, the work you are doing from AGE that we really support very much, as you know, here from the farm committee. And I would like to give you the floor for 7 minutes. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Elena Anshevska
Thank you so much, Madam Chair, members of the Farm Committee. Thank you so much for this opportunity to provide an overview of the updated EU-wide guidelines on gender-neutral job evaluation and classification. Indeed, it's a pleasure to join you today. If we can go on the next slide. First, we will start with a brief overview of how we have developed the toolkit.
So to update the guidelines and develop the step-by-step toolkit on gender-neutral job evaluation and classification, we explored the best available resources that were available out there. We looked into practices in countries that are leading the way in the process, and this included several member states such as Spain, Belgium, Finland, and Sweden. But we also looked at, beyond the EU, and we analyzed countries such as the UK, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway, where gender neutral job evaluation is well established. What we did is to collect and analyze more than 30 resources on gender neutral job evaluation and classification, and we gathered our evidence both through desk research. And we also conducted more than 50 interviews where we consulted EU level social partners, national stakeholders, which included both experts and employers themselves, because we wanted to make sure that the toolkit reflects real world challenges and needs.
Then, in the next stage, we consulted a draft toolkit with EU national and international stakeholders, and we also tested it with employers. The result that we have today is a comprehensive, user-friendly toolkit that provides flexible guidance, adaptable to organizations of all sizes and sectors. On the next slide, we will be able to see who the toolkit is designed for. In brief, the toolkit is designed for everyone who is involved in shaping, negotiating. Excuse me. Could you speak a bit slower?
Oh, yes. Sure.
We appreciate it. Thank you.
Elena Anshevska
Yes. So the toolkit is designed for everyone who is involved in shaping, negotiating, implementing, and overseeing job evaluation and classification. It creates a shared language and a shared methodology, which helps all the actors involved in the process move in the same direction and ensure equal pay for work of equal value between women and men. The primary users are, of course, employers, and this includes both private entities and also public institutions across all sectors. A key characteristic of the toolkit is that it works for organizations of any size.
This includes very small organizations with less than 10 workers, but it can also be used by large employers with hundreds and thousands of staff. It's basically designed to meet organizations where they are in the process, and it's useful both for those who are completely new to the process and also for those who already have a system in place and want to refine it and make sure that it's gender neutral. On the next slide, we will be able to see what the toolkit contains. So the essence of the toolkit is eight practical tools designed for employers. First, two 0.
This tool helps organizations recognize and prevent gender bias, and this is key. This is the core tool for the process. And then tools one to seven guide employers step by step throughout the whole job evaluation and classification process, from setting up the basis to evaluating jobs and then developing a gender neutral pay structure. The toolkit also includes two dedicated tools. One is for trade unions, and another is for workers.
Both are designed to support social dialogue because these tools help to engage constructively with employers, ask the right questions, and understand how jobs are valued and paid. And this is key for building trust and for transparency. A core element of this toolkit is the factor and sub-factor plan. This plan defines the four main criteria: skills, responsibility, effort, and working conditions, and then it breaks them down into subfactors and levels. And this is not only helpful for consistency, but it also supports to make sure that the process is easier to follow.
The toolkit also provides practical templates which support implementation. There are case studies that show how fictional organizations use the tools in practice. There are video tutorials that guide throughout the whole process, and there are also supporting Excel files.
Thank you.
Elena Anshevska
And there are also supporting Excel files that help to simplify the scoring, ensure consistent calculations, and reduce the burden. And this is important, especially for the smaller organizations. On the next slide, we will see that the toolkit recognizes that organizations do not have the same complexity, capacity, and resources. So this is why the job evaluation tools are tailored to the organizational size and context. In essence, there are three different PI pathways, which are designed to keep the process manageable and effective for everyone.
And the three pathways are, you can see them on the slide. The first one is for microorganizations with less than 10 workers. Then, we have a second pathway for small and medium sized organizations from 10 to up to 249 workers, but it's mostly suitable for small organizations with up to 15 roles and limited HR capacity. And finally, there is a pathway for large organizations with more than 200, and 50 workers. And this is the most comprehensive approach.
It relies on the analytical point factor method. And, it's the most comprehensive and the most robust approach to gender neutral job evaluation and classification. The key message is that the tool, the toolkit, helps employers to choose the pathway that fits their reality while still keeping the evaluation gender neutral and relying on the core four factors, skills, effort, responsibility, and working conditions. And on the next slide, we'll be able to see the two formats that are available. There is a full PDF, a comprehensive document with everything users need, from detailed guidance, all the tools, all the templates, and the materials.
And there is also, in addition to the PDF, a web-based version. There is an online version available on the IES website, which is a simpler and a more accessible version. On the next slide, we will also see what other resources we have developed. So there is a policy brief available together, we developed it together with Eurofound. It highlights the benefits of gender-neutral job evaluation, first and foremost, for employers, but also for workers and for social partners.
There is a fact sheet that's available. It summarizes the toolkit. And finally, the webinar. We hosted the webinar on March 26 when we launched the updated guidelines with the aim to bring the toolkit closer to users, show its practical application, and the recording is also available online. So all of these resources are available online.
They're free for use, and we hope they will be useful and helpful in translating the principle of equal pay between women and men into day to day practice. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Thank you very much. There are people coming here. And now we'd like to pass on the floor to the members that are acting as coordinator in principle for two minutes and a half each. So I start by Maria Walsh from the EPP.
So the floor is yours, Maria.
Maria Walsh
Thank you, chair, and thank you both for sharing such, such knowledge and in-depth of your work on the development of EU wide print guidelines under article four of pay transparency directive. The guidelines presented here today are essential to strengthening the enforcement of the principle of equal pay for equal work. I was one of the rapporteurs, the shadow rapporteur, I should say, on pay transparency last Monday, for the EPP group, and I strongly support the objective of pay transparency and, of course, gender neutral job evaluation. It's quite frustrating that we haven't seeding in practice, to be honest with you, across member states. And I'm very worried that news from some member states are looking to challenge the implementation of this directive, and I think, in particular, Sweden and my own country, my own country of Ireland, who are looking at a phased approach to the directive because they don't have the necessary resources or tool kits available.
And as said, very deeply concerning considering three years have passed since the directive was approved and this directive is incredibly important, and it's not a nice to have. It's a need to have, and is required to strengthen the effectiveness of the equal pay principle that has been in place for decades. And if we don't fix it now, we'll never fix it, is my greatest fear. So I ask you both how the commission and IGA will make sure these guidelines actually help the member states that are falling behind. And, again, my own.
I don't like to point fingers when my own country is not doing its best to deliver this while also keeping the rules consistent across the EU and avoiding different approaches in different countries because we'll end up having an imbalance, which is what we have now. I'm gifting back a little bit of timeshare, but thank you very much.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Thank you very much from Esnir Marianne Wind. Do you like to take the floor for two minutes and a half?
Marianne Vind
Thank you very much. I have a question. What countries have not started this work? The implementation has to take place by the summer, very soon. That's my first question.
And my second question: This tool looks incredibly promising and fantastic. Will it be able to solve the problems we have? Because many people are told at their job that their pay is based on their competence, that is based on their skills. And all leaders will be biased if they don't have sufficient knowledge. Many leaders and managers out there are not trained.
They don't know enough about management, but they may have a bias since they were small. They were taught automatically to think that men are worth more than women, boys are worth more than girls. So it can be very hard for managers to start thinking differently. So this idea that our pay is based on our skills and competencies, will we solve that problem with this proposal? Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. And, Margarita de la Pisa, carry on from Patriots. Two minutes and a half. Thank.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
You, madam chair. Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests, we all agree that on equal work for equal pay, but this directive is on pay transparency. It's not about salary equality. The idea is that behind pay transparency, we'll achieve salary equality, but we think that won't happen, and the implementation is going to be damaging because we think it's going to disincentivize employment because of red tape and legal uncertainty. We think this will be the case for men and women.
Your colleague said that it should be applied not only for equal post, but also for post of equal value. We all know that some vacancies are more difficult to fill than others. For other reasons, that might be because of where a job is based, or it might be because you need to draw in new talent. You have to negotiate. So how do we incentivize work?
We can think that this might be discrimination if there's incentivization, but there's also the issue of salary equality and remuneration. So we need so there might be a single policy, but that won't take account of labor and responsibility. Not all sectors have the same needs, and not all jobs. So it's logical that room remuneration be differentiated, and it shouldn't ever be differentiated or shouldn't always be differentiated because of discrimination. When the guidelines aim to strike the balance between evaluation and the relevant social knowledge and dealing with care work as well.
So to avoid that this system creates too much burden for businesses, in particular, small businesses, SMEs. In practice, how do we distinguish between different salaries based on discrimination and those that rather respond to other factors within the market and different sectors? Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Margherita, Carolina Morache, from the left, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.
Carolina Morace
We are against discrimination, and discrimination is always because of men when it comes to pay. It's always in their favor. Thank you very much for this presentation. These guidelines are a very useful instrument to guarantee the better implementation of the pay transparency directive. Because we know that it is not only transparency that is a problem, but how the value of work is assessed.
There are areas that lots of women work in, and those areas are always undervalued. I fear that if the guidelines remain too general or too flexible, then we'll have 27 different approaches to the issue, and then that won't solve the problem. That's why I have a question. How does the commission intend to guarantee that these guidelines are going to be applied in a comparable way in the member states? How can we ensure that we avoid there are different interpretations that then evaluate women's work in and undervalue it?
Maria Noichl
I've listened to what's being said by both speakers, and it's important that with the guidelines that we have, we can evaluate work within a company, within a sector, within a group of workers, and we take that as our focus. There's something else that we need, and I think this was somewhat missing. We also need the proper evaluation of work in those areas that are dominated by women, such as care work, and that's why we need a way of looking that looks across sectors. So how will different things going to be compared? We paying two identical and identical jobs the same way.
So apples with apples is one thing, but comparing apples to pears is quite a different one. So if we're comparing work in the childcare sector with work in a different sector, then that might be somewhat more difficult. So that means we have to have this in a sector system, but also a system that works across different sectors. So I'd be interested to hear from both, from both speakers, how they would address that. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. And I would like to ask myself, first to thank you again for the work you are doing, but I would like to insist on the line, both Maria Noych was highlighting and also Carolina Morache. She says that the problem we have sometimes is that we are receiving very different wages depending on the sector we are in. And we know that feminized sectors, sectors which are mainly composed by women, wages are lower because everything women do is undervalued. I mean, maybe because many of these activities were done previously free at home, not valued, not recognized, not paid for.
And, obviously, when they pass onto the labor market, they do also in an undervalued way. So the horizontal segregation, it is a real problem beyond or beyond of backing this, unequal pay. So this directive, or these guidelines, sorry, are comparing equal pay within the same companies or same sectors. So it is also possible, or are you thinking to move on and to compare also across sectors? So jobs have the same value.
I mean, I know value and price is not the same, and it is, we normally use it as similar because we think that the value of something since we live in a market economy is the price we pay for. But we know it is not the case. So, how can we move beyond these guidelines that are, comparing within the same companies and within the same sector, which is already very important, which is already great, but how we can move on, across sectors. So, thank you. And now, I would like to give back the floor to you for three minutes each, but still we have a bit more time if you need it.
Thank you.
Pinuccia Contino
Thank you very much also for the interest, commitment, passion, and all the very fundamental questions you have all raised. And, of course, I will share with you the state of the situation, possibilities for the future. At the commission, we don't have the magic wand. So we are doing our best with your help, with the help of AGE, of the other institutions, and all the stakeholders, to advance on this. And I'm pretty sure that even if we don't have all the solutions now, together, we are going to make everything better.
And I tell you this because, of course, as the commissioner was concluding, her intervention just before, we are all dreaming about a totally equal gender equal society where really we as women could shine just as we are and valued and considered as highly as it is fair. And this is obviously not necessarily the situation today. Even though we are probably in the place in the world, the European Union, where the situation for women is the best currently. So I would say, will simply give you the answers, the specific answers I can tell you and indicate also that this directive is not the only instrument we have already to fight to gay against the gender pay and pension gap, for example. Several of you have made reference to that.
This has to be taken together with the other directives we have. The directive on work life balance, the directive on women on board, all the bulk of type directives, the body of directives that we already have that are very advanced and that together can bring this societal change. Because you were right when you said that this directive alone cannot solve all the problems linked to the gender pay gap. That's for sure because it is a transparency instrument. Transparency will help change in society both for the gender pay gap, but not only for the gender pay gap and it will not solve all the gender pay gap, but it will also help make clear, for example, that there are entire sectors which are undervalued.
As you were saying, Miss Chair, you're totally right. And why this? Because, actually, those skills that are the most important in care jobs are empathy, are the capacity to connect with the other person, are those which are very often dismissed as soft skills and undervalued because they don't necessarily bring immediately money, or returns on investment, but they bring huge return on investments for the society. And this instrument, this toolkit, is one of the ways that will help bring more clearly awareness about this. And for those stakeholders who will use it very consciously to make this clear, it will help us continue and reinforce the conversation on the value of skills in jobs, for example.
And the other array of initiatives and proposals that we have presented with the gender equality strategy 2026, 2030 that we have discussed earlier with the commissioner aims exactly to that, to complete this legal and operational toolbox to make gender equality a reality, a total reality in the EU. So, and, again, for this specific legal instrument, we, at the commission, together with AGE, and with their support, we are really doing our utmost. We are doing all that we can to help member states, and it's not only the workshop transposition seminars, but it's also the daily discussions and exchanges, clarifications that we have between us and the national administrations that are working on this. I heard that you are worried that some member states may fall behind, may not be at the same level as the others. So I can tell you that on our side, we are helping them all.
We have our first milestone on June 7. After that, of course, we will review the situation in every member state. I can already give you some figures. We know that 14 are well-advanced. What happens with the others?
Well, they will need to tell us where they are, what they're doing, and what their plans are. And we will be discussing together to see how best to support them. We still have funds that we can unlock in the serve, or possibly also, we will see for the new MFF what can be done. So there are a lot of different kinds of tools that we can use. And, I'm not afraid that with our directive, we would worsen the situation.
We will increase the awareness about where the gaps are, where the problems are. And maybe in some sectors or in some specific enterprises, it will not be a gender pay gap. It will be another issue. But this will become very clear, because it will be transparent. And the other thing is that we cannot oblige.
If we look at the terms of the directive. Many things are possible, are options, like the gender-neutral job evaluation and classification. So, of course, we could have taken another way, another direction, but especially those who worked for getting to this result. You know how difficult the negotiations were. So we got the best we could, and it is our firm intention as the commission to do our best to serve Europe in implementing this directive in the best possible way.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Thank you very much. And now, miss Anan Anshewska, please, the floor is yours for answers, and don't go very fast. Otherwise, our interpreters will start to show me this slowdown message. Thank you.
Thank you very much. The floor is yours.
Elena Anshevska
Thank you so much. I will do my best to speak more slowly. Thank you for the questions and also for the consistent support throughout this whole process. What's important to mention here is that the toolkit is a voluntary resource and establishes a shared understanding, a shared language, when it comes to gender-neutral job evaluation and classification across the EU. It's one resource developed to support in this process.
It helps organizations to meet the requirements of the pay transparency directive, but it's important to know that it's not legally binding, and it does not replace national systems. What it is intended to do is to be practical, flexible, and usable with internal resources that organizations already have. So employers are free to adapt and combine the elements available in the toolkit in ways that best suit their context, as long as they ensure that the equal pay principle is respected and that pay structures are based on gender-neutral and objective criteria. What is also useful to note is that the toolkit as such is designed to carry out gender neutral job evaluation and classification within a single organization where jobs have a common organizational structure, base system, governance. So what the toolkit does provide is a common gender neutral framework based on the four criteria that we talked about that are set out in the directive and based on case law, skills, safe work, responsibility, and working conditions.
And these criteria are universal and can help organizations describe and analyze jobs in a consistent way. Even when these jobs come from the different sector and when needed, the toolkit also provides guidance to include additional subfactors and with the detailed guidelines in how to do this, so how to include additional subfactors in a gender neutral manner in case it's needed. So, this is a brief reflection on the key questions that were asked. And as a final point, maybe on my side, it's just to reinforce what Miss Contino, the head of the gender equality unit, already mentioned, the benefits that come from implementing gender neutral job evaluation and classification. Indeed, it's not the only method.
But if implemented, the benefits for organizations are clear. It's good for gender equality, and it's also good for business. And why? Because for organizations, it gives a safeguard and also gives a competitive advantage. So, yes, important for compliance.
But, and in this case, because it reduces the costly, the risk of legal costly claims, but it's also important to emphasize the other aspect in which gender neutral job evaluation is beneficial for organization. It helps to attract and retain top talent. It boosts workers' motivation, strengthens the organization's reputation as a fair employer. And in this case, it unlocks the full potential of the workforce and driving competitiveness, innovation, and productivity. So we hope that the updated EU-wide guidelines will be a useful resource, that they will be widely used.
As mentioned, all of the resources are already available online. They are free for use to whoever is interested. And thank you once again both for the questions and for all the support.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. We really appreciate this presentation, this work. And, just to share with you and to let you know that we would like to have all the possible information about how these guidelines are accepted or not used or not by employers and how this is evolving also in the different member states because we truly believe that this is an essential tool for closing the gender pay gap that is so unfair and so bad for our competitiveness also, not only for our social justice, for our principles since that principle is enshrined in our treaties since the treaty of Rome, but really also for our competitiveness that now that we are talking so much about it.
So, thank you. Thank you very much, and please keep a post of how it's going. Thank you. Thank you very much. And we have finished this point ten minutes before, but we already said to the members that the last point of this morning, which is the point seven on the mission to India, could start a bit earlier.
So we will be starting a bit earlier. This, point like this, we will have a bigger break now and between now and our afternoon session. So this seven point is our mission to India on February. So, thank you. Thank you.
Thank you very much. So I have started straight away, so it looks like I want really to finish earlier.
Elizabeth
And that women see eye to eye with us, well, that's obvious. But at the end of the day, we need to talk to men. To get to the root of the problem. I think that's what we need to do.
And then when negotiating international agreements, this is something which we discuss very often here in Europe, but it's something we cannot lose sight of. It's also very often we come back home, but now we know where the problems are, and we cannot forget that.
We don't want to go back and continue to promote the image of a Bollywood country, but we I think we shouldn't just think about the formal discussions we had in India. We had very interesting discussions in the buses, in between the meetings, between the different political groups. It was a very unusual mission. It's not the type we normally get to participate in. And I think if we can continue this way of working together, which we develop during our and bring that back home to commission work.
Speaker 11
I think that committee work, I think that will really help us going forward.
Lina Gálvez
Indeed. And we have a lot of timing in buses during our mission because the mission was coincident with a huge artificial intelligence summit. There were many prime ministers from many different countries there. So traffic that apparently is already quite bad in Delhi, it's even worse.
And I would like to thank Ganan, our secretary at the civil that is there as well, because they have a lot of patience, and, we all have a lot of patience, but they were really great to schedule, reschedule, change the agenda when necessary because the traffic really did not allow us to reach in time to many places because it was really awful, but we managed. Thanks to them.
So I would like also to highlight what Elizabeth was saying and, also to thank the same time our secretariat. And now, another member of the committee that joined the mission, Avila Al Salani, from Renew.
Abir Al-Sahlani
So the floor is yours, Avila. Thank you, madam chair, and good morning, colleagues. Sorry for my late arrival.
My plane was delayed by one and a half hour without any explanation.
That is the life of an MEP. So let me start with thanking the secretary, but also on our behalf, to the EU Mission to India for the excellent organization and their flick, but also the warmth and happy, you know, always happy face with which they met us in every challenge that we had during our New Delhi visit. It was a very interesting visit to India, but it did not go without challenges, both logistical, but also at some point, insightful challenges because some of the things that we saw, they were a little bit difficult to digest.
Not only so, but also heard. And, of course, a big thank you to the head of the delegation, our own chair, for her excellent leadership during the visit. What's truly stayed with me from this visit was the gap between legislation, rights on paper, and lived realities.
And, if there is one example that I want would show where words on paper and lived realities, how they differ, it would have been India because as many of my colleagues already pointed out, India has been a democratic country for a very long time. It is considered to be the biggest democracy in the world.
With the very strong constitutional defense of women's rights, but still, or when you go to real life, the picture is very, very different. And this is also for us to reflect on the anti-gender movements that are gaining power in Europe. And how they impact also this gap and increase it, it comes to words on papers and lived realities. And that's a growing gap, and we really need also within the EU gender responsive policies and laws, and to keep an eye on that also inside.
One other maybe more of a positive note, insight that stayed with me was the vibrant civil society organizations and the representatives that we met. How fearless they were in taking some terms and saying some words that for us as Europeans are still sensitive to address. It was very openly spoken about abortion rights and SRHR rights. And in a way that has become less common in the EU, unfortunately. But also, the kind and the amount of work that they are doing were really inspirational.
Women in India are fighting for their own survival, and that was really very clear in the exchanges that we have. And, no matter how much of political promises they've got, civil society organizations or women. And no matter how many governmental initiatives they have, EU projects that they are, and these very impactful civil society organizations, the support for gender equality is shrinking in India. And that means also the funding. So we have, as EU, must invest in those projects and in those people. We must invest in India and all around, and it is urgent.
Where funding is cut, voices are turned down, and they are silenced. And political will is shrinking. So they really must double down and not back. And I think that this is a moment where the EU must show real leadership.
And one of the concrete examples that I can give is that many of the actors that we met from civil society asked us not to post their pictures or names on our social media. So, I took note of that very strongly. Because the fear was really there for repercussions, for threats, and these women should not fear being active in civil society. One another thing that I want to point out is maybe not very particular to this committee, but in the committee, where we are discussing the gender targets in all your EU development aid that is being maybe rolled back or, you know, reformulated.
I don't have any problems with the different names, but the aim should be the same, that we should have gender targets. Because that will make our institutions globally more aware, but also they have something to measure towards when they are dividing the EU aid, development aid to the different NGOs. And if we ensure that we have gender targets there, then we can also make sure that these organizations that we met at least have EU to go to and to get funding for the important work that they are doing.
And gender equality must be considered in all policy areas, as I said. And it doesn't really apply to the historic trade agreement that we have with India that we signed for not so long time ago. And we have to make sure that gender equality and human rights in general are respected and implemented. So I hope that the FAM committee will take our key learnings from the mission and set it into practice. For example, we must keep aiming too high to have to ensure that in the global instrument, gender equality is a priority and not left on the sidelines.
Thank you so much.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Thank you very much. In fact, it is a lesson learned. We really need to keep including gender actions in our external action on budget. Again, this is important.
On the language. That we really need to adopt the international language. And not inventing new things.
And, also, of course, we were very touched of what was happening there.
I'm very lucky to be European, but as Xavier and other colleagues said, we have learned also a lot. From them as well. Very much. And, so we are tiny compared to India.
That it is, is huge. And there are a lot of things also to learn from them, especially for this very vibrant civil society. And now, we still have a couple of minutes.
If there are other members that would like to take the floor. Very shortly, If not, I will, thanks again the secretary and also Susana for the great job they did there. To thank the interpreters, for today's, or this morning session, all the members that went to the mission and they have participated in this morning session.
And let's move really with this collaboration with Indian parliamentarians because that will be also a way to keep collaborating with the Indian civil society and also with these great women we met. During our mission. So, thank you.
Thank you very much, and see you at 2:00. 04:00. Thank you.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.