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 sittingsMélissa Camara
program politically because it's not a neutral text. Through the amendments, we have seen some priorities. We want to boost the focus on equality and the use of DAFNI to deal with gender-based violence, and we want to have multi-annual funding for civil society. Now those amendments are very important because they show that there is a majority here to make sure that the program becomes a tool and not just a financial framework. And this is a program that needs to have a direct impact on women's lives and on protecting victims.
It also needs to support the organizations on the ground and let them work, but it shows something else as well. It shows that there's a need to make clear political choices, because in reality, we've got two visions here coming out of the amendments. There's one that wants to make the program a driver for fighting violence, defending rights. And then there's another vision that tries to water that down, and it wants to hide these gender-based challenges and weaken civil society. Now my priority is simple.
I want to make sure that the program is a practical instrument to support rights. And this will be done by making clear commitments, firm commitment to providing the funding as well. And it's also going to be done with one simple demand. We must not water down the political heart of the program because these parties, equality, fighting violence, supporting civil society, these are the things that justify its existence. So in the current context where we're seeing growing attacks on women's rights and on LGBTQIA+, we need to be very cautious here because these rights are already being rolled back.
And we want to send out a clear message to people who are questioning our rights everywhere in Europe. And I believe that we can find a balance during our discussions, and we can keep the ambitions that we want in the text. I know that work has been started, and things are moving on well, and I'd like to thank the groups for that. Let's continue with this dynamic. Let's keep this shared ambition to make sure the program is a tool used to support the rights.
Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Merci, Melissa. And now we start with the different political groups. From the EPP, Eleonora Meletti, on behalf of Paulo Donasmento Cubral.
Eleonora Meleti
Thank you, chair. Mister Donasmento could not be here today with us, so I will read his statement on his behalf. Dear chair, dear colleagues, I would like to begin by thanking all colleagues for the constructive cooperation throughout the ongoing negotiations on this file, and in particular, Dera Porter, MEP, and Melissa Kamara. From the outset, I have consistently defended within Agora EU the strong and meaningful integration of gender equality across the three strands of the program, culture, media plus, CRV plus, including DAFNET, as well as supported synergies between strengths, namely in advancing gender equality while also believing in preserving their distinct identity and autonomy. I firmly believe that the promotion of the union values must go hand in hand with advancing women's rights and ensuring their balanced and visible representation in the public sphere and discourse.
This means that the program must actively create opportunities to advance equality and non-discrimination, including by promoting gender equality and eliminating gender stereotypes in cultural, creative, media content, and the gaming sector. A key priority, particularly under DAFNER, but also across the program, must be the fight against gender-based violence in full support of the implementation of the EU directive on combating violence against women. This includes both offline and online violence, such as cyberstalking, online harassment, and the nonconsensual dissemination of intimate content, including deepfakes. These forms of abuse target women and can severely affect their freedom of expression, participation in political and public life, often leading to withdrawal from public debate and undermining democratic participation itself, as well as having effects on women's mental health. Therefore, the program should support initiatives that promote the balanced participation of women and men in democratic life, media, and civil society, including leadership roles, and ensure accessible support for organizations working on gender equality and fundamental rights, which play an important role in demographic resilience.
I must also stress the need for strong protection of women in public life, including politicians and journalists who are particularly exposed to hate speech and online violence. This is part of strengthening European democracy, culture, and the media. In addition, this important program funding must provide protect predictability, including through annual calls for multi-annual projects, ensuring stability for smaller organizations and women-led initiatives. At the same time, the program must promote women's entrepreneurship by improving access to finance, networks, and business opportunities in the cultural, creative, and individual sectors. Additionally, I support inclusion of the promotion of consent as a guiding principle as part of a broader prevention approach, which is crucial in advancing gender equality and respect-based framework.
Finally, I would like to highlight the need for specific attention to certain regions, in particular the outermost regions, where gender inequalities can be more pronounced, therefore avoiding double discrimination and ensuring equal access to opportunities under this program. Thank you.
Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle
Thank you very much. Now from S and D, Sabrina Rep. Thank.
Sabrina Repp
You, colleagues. Maria is the shadow, but she's not here today, unfortunately. So I'm pleased to stand in for her. And I am also a member of the Culp and Education Committee, and I think it's very good that the committee is also working on this. And when it comes to the actual shape of the program, it needs to have an effect.
And on behalf of Maria, I'd like to thank the rapporteur Melissa Kamara for the constructive work, and I'd like to thank her for the balanced compromises that she's already presented during the negotiation. First, in S and D, there are two clear priorities that need to be at the heart of it. Firstly, is the targeted earmarking of the funds. And then secondly, we want to raise the profile of DAFNI in Serv. We need to make sure that this doesn't get lost in the entire budget.
We need to make sure that we have the targeted resources that are implemented. And then when the Agora EU program is created, and whenever it combines these existing programs, we need to make sure that one doesn't get forgotten. And this is done in a context where we're wanting to take equality seriously in Europe. And to do that, you need to make sure that there is funding for those organizations that work on a daily basis to protect women from violence and to guarantee gender equality. So we need to have reliable funding for existing structures, in particular as part of the DAFLE program.
We need to have better access to funding for civil society players as well at the local level in particular. Anne Maria would like to thank you for the work that you've done now, and is looking forward to the next steps. Thank you.
Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle
Thank you. And now, from Patriots, Margarita Lapiz. Thank.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
Thank you very much. The Agora program is one of the main financial instruments of the European Union for 2028, 2234. Today, we're seeing how a program that should serve all citizens is running the risk of turning into another ideological instrument. It's talking about mainstream, but not including the plurality. If you don't have a mainstream gender ideology, you are out of the debate and out of European funding as well.
That's not a perception. This is something that we are seeing. There are some projects that are being excluded for not aligning with the European view or not complying with the parameters. The European Union can't behave as an ideological filter. A correct financing system should serve everybody and should not be designed to leave out projects that do good social work because, in their view, they don't fulfill the gender mainstreaming requirements, especially when they're presented by Christian organizations.
They only seem to be funding feminist and LGBTQ groups, which seem to have the objective of supporting abortion. This is incoherent, and it should lead to a change in direction. Because if the budgets are not fair, you're going to create a huge social conflict.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. ECR has not nominated, but yeah. Do you please take the question. Thank.
Beatrice Timgren
Thank you very much for your work on this opinion. We're going to make some proposals for amendments as well, and we do see things slightly differently. Yes. We have the European budget, and we want it to have a practical impact on women's rights and their jobs and security. And we think that we also need to respect proportionality, and we need to reduce the administrative burden at the same time.
We shouldn't be creating more bureaucracy. And our aim is simple. What we want to do is focus less on the process. We want to focus more on the results. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Now from Renew, I have Veronika Sifroval. Don't know if Raquel Garcia Ermida Vanderbale. Yes. Gracias, Presidenta.
Yeah.
Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle
A colleague, Veronica, could not be here today, so she has asked me to present her contribution to the opinion. In her opinion, the program should help in advancing gender equality and mainstreaming and to counter anti gender narratives, disinformation, and gender based online violence and cyberbullying. There is a need for continued and adequate support for women's rights organizations and specialized services for women, which operate on the frontline across the member states and hold the specialized expertise required to address the root causes and the manifestations of gender based violence. The program needs to be accessible to NGOs at all levels, local, regional, national, and transnational. And the funding will earmark specific funds for all civil society organizations, such as the ones working on advancing gender equality and countering gender-based violence and online violence.
This is something that civil society and NGOs have been calling for, to ensure that funds for them are earmarked. And I would like also, on behalf of Veronica, to thank the rapporteur and all the shadow rapporteurs. I heard a lot of agreements in what the priorities of this program from the fan perspective should be, and I think it will be a productive negotiation. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. And on behalf of the left, Carolina Boracze, the floor is yours. Thank.
Carolina Morace
you. Thank you, madam chair. Well, firstly, I'd like to say that this is a secular institution which represents a pluralist society, and that's what it needs to remain. So that means you shouldn't be against religion, but it means you should welcome them all. So firstly, I'd like to thank the rapporteur for the excellent work that's been done and for the constructive approach taken.
And I do welcome the inclusion of references in the amendments to more gender mainstreaming, to women's rights, to sexual and reproductive health rights, and the contrast to the anti-gender narration. And I'd welcome, in particular, the creation of a Daphne section that would be separate. Daphne has played a fundamental role in supporting organizations working to combat gender-based violence. And in a context where violence against women, even online, is still too widespread, we do need to keep raising awareness about it, and we need to provide the resources. DAFNI needs to be an effective instrument, and you need to do more than just recognize it at the political level.
You need to provide the funding for it, and it needs to have a separate budget. It needs to be one that's predictable and one that can't be transferred. We also need to look at the impact results. We need to have disaggregated data on gender violence. It's not just a technical point.
We need to see if EU money does contribute to real equality, because you don't just defend rights in a text. You could defend them by providing adequate resources.
Lina Gálvez
I don't see the shadow of a death from ESN. So, I'm pleased now to pass the floor to the corrupters of lead committees, that are here with us today. I can see both of them. So I will start by Carl, by Emma Rachowitz. So the floor is here, Emma, for two and a half minutes.
Emma Rafowicz
Hello, everyone. I will speak in French. Thank.
Thank you very much, madam chairman, and thank you to Melissa Camara, the rapporteur, for the opinion. And thank you also to all of the shadows. I want to thank all of those working with us on the first version of the FAM Committee's opinion, and Alice Kunker, with whom we share this report. Let me tell you something about the Agora EU negotiations. We're currently in dialogue with the legal service.
We want to fight for equality and the fight for democracy at the heart of the program. We think that there could be a major political impact of this project. This is an important program because this could help the European Union have a project to defend its democratic values and equality. In Liebe and Kalt, we believe in fundamental rights, cultural sovereignty for Europe. We have an ambitious vision for this text.
We want a program to protect those who create, inform, and become involved. This is not about making Agora into an ideological instrument. What we want to avoid is not doing anything which would put Europe at the mercy of foreign reactionary regimes. We propose defending artists' independence, their freedom to create, and protecting them from generative AI. We want to protect their rights, including labor rights, and we want to protect books and music, which are currently under threat.
And it's important to recognize the work of everybody, especially women in these sectors. It's also important to defend civil society organizations within SERV. And in conclusion, we've started political discussions on this in the belief that this program can be a real transformational lever helping to spread equality and democracy. This is far from being a way of making Europe strong and powerful through the programs it has. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
And now I will give the floor to the co-rapporteur for Liebe, Alice Gunke. The floor is here for two minutes and a half. Thank you.
Alice Kuhnke
Thank you, madam chair, and thank you, Melissa Kemada, for your draft opinion. As the Liebe rapporteur for the Agora EU program, I share many of the views expressed in your proposal and in the amendments tabled by the shadows. Challenges to European democracy, the rule of law, and fundamental rights are increasingly urgent. Civil society organizations and human rights defenders face unprecedented restrictions and funding cuts. So let me be clear.
Funding for democracy and rights must not take a backseat or be seen as conflicting with priorities such as security, competitiveness, and defense. On the contrary, these policy areas are essential to European preparedness, democratic resilience, and civil defence. So this approach must form the foundation of the European Parliament's position on the Agora EU program and be reflected in the overall MFF framework. The commission's evaluation of the SERVE program shows that the equality and daftness strands have been the most underfunded relative to demand. At the same time, the fundamental rights agency has flagged that LGBTQI, SRHR, and women's rights organizations are particularly targeted by threats, and operate in hostile environments.
So, my co-rapporteur, Emma Ravovic, and I have therefore proposed reinstating the DAFNER program as a self-standing strand, and I welcome seeing this ambition reflected in the FEM draft opinion. Robust and ring-fenced funding for gender equality and against gender-based violence is a key to be able to meet the current challenges and match the commission's policy ambitions. I attempt to take all the fem amendments into full consideration in our upcoming work in the lead committees. Thank you, and I look forward to the finalized opinion. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Thank you very much. Any other member wanted to take the floor? So if not, I will give the floor back to Melissa Camara, to the rapporteur for farm committee. I will speak in French.
Mélissa Camara
I want to thank shadow rapporteurs, the co-rapporteurs. Thank you for this solid basis for work, and thank you for the will to work together on this file. As Emma was saying, this is not just any old file. This is beating a path to fundamental rights, equality, and protection of people. And the timing is important too.
There is a widespread backlash. There are the rights of women and other people under threat. This is important from the point of view of the future of the European Union. We should be demanding. We should ensure that we fight for gender equality.
We should combat gender-based violence, and we should support civil society, which is under threat from all sides and is in the frontline of defending our fundamental rights and European democracy. Those are the ideas underpinning this opinion. I think we're ready to go into the technical and political negotiations on a sound footing. Thank you for the work done so far, and I look forward to continuing to work on this with you all. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
And now we move to point five. We closed this point on Agora EU, and we moved to another very important program fund within the European Union, which is the European Social Fund. So we start now the consideration of amendments, for our firm opinion to the on the European Social Fund for the period 2028, 2034. It that it should be the main financial instrument to implement the European pillar of social rights, supporting quality employment skills and social inclusion across all member states. Within the deadline for amendments, the deadline for amendment was set on March at noon, and 173 amendments have been tabled by members.
And now I would like to give the floor to the rapporteur for our opinion, from the S and D, Alessandra Borretti. So the floor is yours, Alessandra.
Alessandra Moretti
Thank you, madam chair. I will speak in my language, Italian.
I'd like to start by thanking my colleagues who are working on the text and who tabled many constructive amendments. And I'd like to thank the staff who have also been working on them. So the first presentation, well, during that first presentation, we highlighted some things that mean that we're not fully satisfied with the commission's text when it comes to the European Social Fund. And so that's why I think it's crucial that we work on it through the opinion. Firstly, there's the fact that it's not a separate autonomous fund with a dedicated budget.
And this requirement for flexibility means that it could be a double-edged sword. It could penalize social priorities when it comes to other economic interests. And we can't accept that gender equality is not a specific objective of the fund. We know very well that women are disproportionately hit by poverty, unemployment, and that they live in a segregated part of the world when it comes to jobs, and they often have part-time work. It's difficult for them to access housing and high-quality health care as well.
And then there are specific expectations on women's bodies. And looking at that context, we cannot accept a European social fund that does not include fighting inequality and fight for equality between genders. And I hope that here in this room, you all agree with me on that point at least. And then there's another crucial point for my political group and other political groups. Last February, the commission said that the citizens' initiative, my voice, my choice, must be funded through the European Social Fund.
And, of course, we had hoped that they would be more courageous and more ambitious in the commission. And what we would have liked to have had was a fund that would be dedicated to that initiative. However, the priority needs to be to ensure that women can have sexual and reproductive health rights, which also provides them access to that safe abortion and other rights. Our task needs to be to encourage member states to use the ESF to guarantee safe, legal abortion. Abortion, therefore, would not harm women's health.
And in particular, this needs to be for women in vulnerable situations or who cannot cover the costs linked to these terminations. And as the commission has said, safe abortion is a matter of public health. It cannot be ignored. Access to safe terminations of pregnancy is important when it comes to respecting the rights of our treaty. So I'd like to say to colleagues who for months have been working to support My Voice, My Choice, and who, along with me, voted in favor of that text and did so with pride.
And in this committee, let's not just destroy all the work that we've done. Discuss this within your own political groups and take a clear message that this is the only option for us to make sure that we finalize and achieve this objective that many women vote for, and which, unfortunately, many women have lost their lives to. And our colleague talked about the institutions being secular, and I think they need to be secular not only to welcome all religions, but also to protect all women regardless of ideology and political beliefs. Abortion is a painful choice which determines and which means it's a psychological and physical trauma. So it's not fair, not right to look at this fight for safe, legal abortion due to self-determination rights as one that's only supporting abortion.
That's not it. I repeat, safe legal abortion protects the health of women and especially the health of the most fragile women.
Alessandra. Thank.
You, Alessandra. That's right.
Lina Gálvez
Our Polish colleagues, as you know, they have a long fight for sexual and reproductive health, rights. So from the EPP, I don't see Arba Kokolari, Gabriela. Are you talking by the EPP? Gabriela Gerseni? It's always very difficult for me to pronounce her name, so why I always say Gabriela.
Gabriella Gerzsenyi
No worries, madam chair. Thank you very much. I will speak in Hungarian. Firstly.
First and foremost, I want to speak as a Hungarian and not as a member of the European People's Party. I want to thank the colleagues for the work done and say how important this fund is, and how important it is for the funds to be spent correctly and maintain the priorities which have been financed so far. It's important to have an integrated approach. In the countryside, you need infrastructure, access to services and help for women in pregnancy, access to loans and financial security, and, of course, education and job opportunities. This helps to foster economic growth and prosperity in the economy overall.
It's essential for women to live a full life as members of society. This requires funding, and I want to react to my voice, my choice that I would be more circumspect and highlight how important it is to respect the laws of individual countries. Thank you.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
The European Social Fund is a historic European fund created to boost job prospects, prosperity, and to correct inequalities. However, we're very concerned that when there's talk of sending money to health services, the European institutions are only supporting a single orientation. I want to be very clear. We can't consider abortion health care, and it shouldn't be funded as such. We would like to see you just as enthusiastic about making sure that every pregnant woman has sufficient care.
Situations lead to this dramatic choice. Abortion is not a fundamental right, and so we don't want the charter of our country to be changed to include it. It doesn't just manipulate the use of the fund or put the European Union into areas of competence it doesn't have. It also diverts funds from real needs, helping people with the real issues that face women's health. In this women's committee, we have a responsibility to guarantee that these funds really respond to the real needs.
We're talking about real jobs, training, work-life balance, and the freedom to choose your own life plan with the possibility of creating a family. The family is still a central pillar for social protection and deserves recognition as such. Increasingly, those of women are alienated from gender rhetoric because they see that their situation is not responded to by it. This is using associations to further a political agenda. Let's make the European Social Fund an instrument that really serves everybody, focused on the real needs of women and a broader sense of human dignity.
Thank you.
Thank.
Valérie Devaux
You, Araporta colleagues. We have the opportunity to present our priorities last time around. Mine are very clear. I have 4 priorities to defend. Basic assistance to women taking into account disabilities.
Women with disabilities have extra obstacles in terms of access to employment, and they suffer higher levels of poverty. Education is important because disadvantage starts at school. And then my voice, my choice, which is one of the most sensitive issues, it's important not to encroach on national sensibilities, but access to health services is vital. For my group, it is important that this be reflected in our text, and this needs also to be housed in the future budget. The European social fund is a way of providing for 1,200,000 people.
And I appeal to the pro-European people in our committee, but we also appeal to colleagues in the MPL committee. Thank you.
Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle
Merci, Greens. I don't see Benedetta Scuderi. So left, Carolina Marache.
Thank.
Carolina Morace
Thank you very much, Alessandra, to your team for the work that you've done so far. We can't wait to cooperate on a strong, progressive report. Our shadow rapporteur, Catherine Fouchon from the left, wants the European Social Fund to make a real difference in people's lives, particularly women's lives. The ESF Plus is one of the biggest successes of the European Union, and it should be constantly protected and enhanced in order to respond to our citizens' needs. Today, many women are still facing obstacles.
They take on more care work that's not remunerated, and they have higher probabilities of occupying lower-paid jobs. Often, they earn less than men over the course of their lives, even when they do the same job. This turns into lower pensions and a higher risk of poverty. Workplaces should also be safe and fair. No woman should experience harassment, discrimination, or violence in the workplace.
We need clear actions to deal with these problems and to create respectful workplaces in all sectors. We also need to recognize that not all women face the same challenges. Migrant women, Roma women, women with disabilities, single mothers, older women, and LGBTQ+ people experience additional hurdles. Our committee should respond to their real situation to make sure that nobody is left behind. At the same time, we should invest in training and skills so that women can access high-quality jobs.
We also need to improve access to these services to make sure that there are no obstacles for women who want to access high-level jobs and can get the training they need. Lastly, ESF Plus should remain a strong independent fund with sufficient resources to make sure that decent work exists, reduce poverty, and promote equality. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Grazie. I do not see anyone from ESS, so I would like to open the floor to other members that want to take the floor. I have Rosa Starras and Raquel Garcia, myself, but there's no one else. So, Rosa Starras, the floor is yours for one minute, please. Thank you.
Rosa Estaràs Ferragut
Thank you, President. I'm speaking in Spanish. The
European Social Fund in the commission's proposal has set off all the alarm bells, because it was going to be diluted into the pillar one with fisheries and agriculture. That's worrying for vulnerable groups, and particularly vulnerable women, women with disabilities, migrant women, children. Next week or last week, rather, the DG budget of the commission adopted a report, and we are continuing to work to make sure that the European Social Fund is separate, solid, and clearly focused on social issues, where social issues are highest on the agenda. So dealing with vulnerable people, migrants, people with disabilities, children, homeless people, Roma people. So this fund has to be clearly defined, and the amendments that I've tabled on behalf of the EPP go in that direction.
It has to be strong and independent, with enough funding. We can't allow Europe's social fund to be downgraded. We have to remain a priority. We have to have high-quality, inclusive jobs. The amendments go in that direction.
In terms of my voice, my choice, I abstained from the vote personally, but I think that if the commission wanted to listen to this as an initiative, it would have the fund separately. Because when we talk to the tertiary sector and we say they're going to put their hands on the European Social Fund budget, the third sector doesn't agree. All they want is that the budget they've had until now doesn't go down. It's a real breath of air for them financially. So we want to really ring-fence those organizations.
Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle
So we want to protect the European Social Fund and not reduce the funding. Thank you. Okay. Then I'll continue in Spanish. Sometimes I like to.
I'd like to touch on the issue of support for pregnant women and families. I think the European Social Fund has had a great deal of success in supporting all vulnerable groups. Not all pregnant women are considered part of a vulnerable group, but there are some cases in which there are extra vulnerabilities. And we do want to support families, all families, single parent families, traditional families with one father and one mother, people from the rainbow collective as well. We shouldn't discriminate. This is not ideological.
It's a question of fundamental equality. And the last point I'd like to make is that of whether the right to health care, such as access to safe and legal abortion, should be covered by this fund. I think it should. And I think the problems of not having legal and safe access to abortion, and the consequences of it when it comes to social inequality, can be seen in Poland, for example. And here we have Polish guests today who can talk to us about the consequences for Polish women of illicit abortions.
And even though they would admit that it's not ideal to create a separate fund for My Voice of My Choice, the commission has said that other funds could be used, including the ESF, but I do think we should use that possibility. Once again, it's not compulsory. Those member states that want to use it can use it. I know, for example, that in The Netherlands, there are lots of civil society organizations that are interested in using those funds because they're the ones that support women coming from other countries such as Poland to get basic health care, which includes access to abortion. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Gracias. And now I have also asked for the floor myself in order to distinguish my role as chair as the role of S and D MEP. I will speak Spanish as well. So today was gonna be a very Spanish final.
Of all, I agree that the European Social Fund is an independent and solid fund. I think that seems to generate consensus. However, we can't ask for it to be a solid and well-funded fund and then be against increasing the overall union budget or be against developing our own resources or be against having a joint debt, because that's not compatible. However, I would like to refer to something that's being talked about here today and had a lot to do with the role of the gender equality committee, and that is whether or not to include the response to the assistance initiative, my voice my choice, into the European Social Fund. As Raquel was saying, it's not the ideal solution.
But given the budget restrictions we have, it is a place where we could already start to use this option. Remember that the right to safe and legal abortion doesn't force anybody to abort. That should be obvious, but we have to keep repeating it. However, not having the right to abortion does push many women, many women who have undesired pregnancies often as a result of sexual assault or even rape as a weapon of war, to risk their lives. And many health professionals are well risking consequences for performing abortions.
So this initiative doesn't force any member states to change their legislation. So it doesn't change the subsidiarity principle that applies here. It just means that any member state can choose to access these funds. So I just wanted to set out those points because sometimes the debate can drift due to disinformation, or it can get lost in the bushes, which is not very helpful if we want to have a democratic conversation.
To my role too as a chair, and I would like to give the floor back to the rapporteur, Alessandra Moretizo.
Alessandra Moretti
Thank you very much, madam chair. I did appreciate colleagues' input on this very sensitive and important subject for vulnerable women. The European Social Fund has a role, particularly for women who live in Europe facing exclusion, facing legal repercussions, and who experience low-paid jobs and discrimination. I do want to reiterate, though, that when we're faced with women who resort to abortion, often these women are the most marginalized. Often, they have been victims of abuse, mistreatment, or violence.
So often these two profiles come together. I wish that we could have had a separate fund, but I do understand the Commission's intention when it comes to using this fund to cover legal and safe abortion for women. I'm also going to take on board Margarita's comment. The idea here is not to encourage abortion. As the chairman quite rightly said, this is not to encourage abortion.
It's to guarantee a principle which is enshrined in our country's constitution. Our country's constitutions talk about the rights and the freedom of everybody to body that has been mistreated, abused, and is the site of a pregnancy as a result of that violence. If these were our daughters who had been abused or mistreated, and a pregnancy resulted from that, if that daughter was 16 or 17 years old or lived in a fragile social situation. How could we deny them legal and safe options? Especially, how can we deny them the bodily autonomy to decide what to do with the pregnancy?
Even you on the right have to bear that in mind when you deal with these issues, so ideologically. The World Health Organization says that every year, those 47,000 women around the world die every year from clandestine abortions. This is a huge issue. Many of those are in Europe, in countries such as Poland, which is so well represented here today, Hungary, where this is not yet considered a fundamental right for women. We need to guarantee all women this right and this freedom, just as men have.
There should be no distinction, particularly here in Europe. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
And now we move to the next point, which is also a very important point because it determines the rest of the policies we can make or not, which is point six, which is establishing a budget expenditure tracking and performance framework and other horizontal rules for the union programs and activities. So I'm the rapporteur for this one. So I will give the floor first to myself and then to the other shadow rapporteurs and also finally to the co-rapporteurs from batch and committees. I see them both. Thank you for being here with us in the farm committee.
So the budget, as we all know, is the main tool for political action because it establishes our priorities. The European Union's budget has a great impact on people's lives both within and outside Europe, and, of course, on women's lives everywhere. The European Union's next long-term budget represents a key opportunity to safeguard and strengthen prosperity, peace, and democracy based on gender equality, social priorities, and environmental sustainability. However, the current European Commission's proposal for the multi-annual financial framework 2028-2034 does not adequately address the challenges people face today and does not prioritize what really matters in women's lives to achieve gender equality. Implementation of gender equality throughout the MFF is not fully realized.
Gender equality appears as a horizontal principle, but it is far, I insist, it is far from being on the same level as social and climate ones. Integration of gender equality is less comprehensive or less institutionalized due to difference in marker methodologies, with most limited range of application, with no spending target, with no do significant harm principle method accounted for potential negative effects. And finally, it constitutes the weakest link among the objectives set out in the proposed program regulation, despite the provisions of Article 8 of the treaty, the fundamental of the European Union. In all its activities, I quoted, the union shall aim to eliminate inequalities and to promote equality between men and women. I always like to insist that gender equality is not something we are inventing here today or any other day.
It is enshrined in our treaties. I insist. It is enshrined in our treaties, and I insist, because sometimes it seems that we forget that this is the case. Achieving real gender equality requires a more transformative approach, which involves examining and redesigning systems and structures to promote gender equality for all. This implies funding the application of gender mainstreaming to cover all MFF programs, and ensuring that support for gender equality is applied consistently across the European Union budget.
We need to bring gender equality into all policies to achieve that all policy areas adopt a gender equality perspective, and also all over the policy cycle. In an ideal scenario, with specific training in gender mainstreaming and policies aligned to advance gender equality, we will be looking at a sound regulatory proposal from the commission. But we don't live in such an ideal world, unfortunately. The reality is what it is. And we run the risk that the world conceived, cross-cutting theoretical principle of gender equality will be watered down when put into practice.
And with that, in the end, we will take a stake powers rather than forward on bringing equality to all policies, on implementing this gender equality principle that I insist once more, it is enshrined in our treaties and is a core fundamental value of the union. Until now, the European Union has relied on a dual approach to gender equality. On the one hand, there are specific actions on target funding for gender equality, secure few programs specific gender equality objectives. On the other hand, there is agenda mainstreaming throughout the budget cycle from programming to implementation and evaluation, including through expenditure tracking from 2021-2027 period. This methodology deals with the budgetary contribution to gender equality of each program, as well as the overall budgetary contribution to gender equality.
I don't know if you are aware, but if you don't know, I will share with you a figure that I think is very interesting. The figure shows that only 12% of union budget of 158,400,000,000 between 2021 and 2024 supported gender equality. I insist. 12%. And I will remind another data that I like to remind many times here in this committee, that we are 10 million more women within the European Union.
I repeat, 10 million more women. The MFF 2028, 2035 has no earmarked funding solely dedicated to multi gender equality, marking the end of a period of more than thirty years in which Europe, following the Beijing conference and the introduction of gender mainstreaming, has funded projects to advance gender equality. It is important to remind the importance of international standards such as the OECD and AGES tracking methodology, which means establishing mandatory gender impact assessment, gender analysis to inform the designs of interventions, explicit gender equality objectives, and do not harm approach. It is very important to broaden the areas on the intervention in gender equality to reflect the European Union's gender equality objectives such as the ones on the road map on women's rights developed into the gender equality strategy 2026, 2030 that was just presented one month and a half ago. At the same level of another horizontal principles, the proposed is to have a spending target for funding new coefficients for application.
Europe has made significant progress on gender equality, but gender mainstreaming remains an unfinished task. In the current climate marked by strong backlash against women's rights, there is a need for greater and more effective integration of agenda perspective in the European Union budgets. I would like to finish by saying that the advances we have made need to be strengthened, and we cannot take a step back. I will just mention what happened in my own region in Andalusia. We established by law in 2004 to do agenda budgeting, and we were a model taken by many other places and many other countries.
That has been reduced to anything because the new conservative government has decided to simplify processes. And we can't simplify democracy. We can't simplify women's rights. So we really need to advance in a budget that really reflects our core principles as it is, gender equality. And now I would like to give the floor to the shadow rapporteurs.
Okay. So the corrupteurs need to leave earlier. So if that is okay with you, I will first, before giving the floor to the shadow rapporteurs, I will pass on the floor to the corrupteurs Jean Marc Germain. The floor is yours.
Jean-Marc Germain
Thank you, Chair, and thank you for inviting us to this presentation of your draft report. Well, a couple of comments. First, together with my fellow Cora Porter, Nicolas Erbs, we decided to adopt a bottom-up approach. So we will read carefully your draft opinion and then also what the shadow will comment and amend your proposal, but it's really important to build on what the committee will produce and also what the stakeholders will say on the regulation because we want this not only to be a statistical gateway, but a tool useful for action. And if we want it to be useful for action, then we want it to be relevant to all the policies that are led by the European Union.
As far as your proposal, here I will speak more on my quality of S and D because we didn't yet agree on what we're going to do with horizontal principles to with my corruptor. But more or less, I fully agree with what you said. I mean, this regulation performance regulation, even if it's not replacing whatever is entering in financial regulation, seems to be a big step backward with regard to the best standard that we want to have in this union with gender mainstreaming and to fulfill one of the key goals of the union of gender equality. But more or less trying to align on the OECD best practice would be, of course, for me a very key objective. First, as you proposed in your reports to make sure that gender equality is mandatory across all your program.
Second, you speak of binding gender spending targets. I don't know exactly what is the best level, but I think that we should not only have a target for green transition, but also for agenda budgeting. And I also agree that if we go in that direction, the performance frameworks, then we shall have two different targets, one for the overall one, but also one for the money that is specifically dedicated to fulfill agenda equality. Also agree with the idea that we need an additional level of rating. You call it a new zero category.
But it's true that we need something for action with unproven gender relevance. And last, if I take the most or at least a couple of your proposals, I think that we really have to work on the do not harm to gender equality principle because it's an international standard, and it cannot be in a way or in as something that we have in our framework. But, of course, this has to be discussed, negotiated within the channel ECON and batch committee. Thank you very much.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Thank you very much. And now I would like to pass the floor to Inglis Herz from KONT. Thank you very much for coming, and the floor is yours.
Niclas Herbst
Thank you, Chair, for having me. This is a very complex file, an overarching file, the most horizontal file. Therefore, it's extremely important for us, and I can only subscribe to what my colleague, Jean Marc, just said, that it's a bottom-up process and that we are really interested in the opinion of the Specialized Committee. That's extremely important. Nevertheless, it is also very important that we have, and I understand this fully, that we have a strong focus on gender equality as a horizontal principle across the EU budget.
And I think one important issue is that we need to support the gender tracking methodology and the use of sex-disaggregated data, as it contributes to better monitoring of the impact of EU spending. At the same time, it is essential that any improvements to the framework remain proportionate, extremely important, and do not increase the administrative burden for beneficiaries and the implementing partners. And this is for the final beneficiaries, not for the commission, when it comes to simplification. And we do believe that gender mainstreaming should be implemented in a way that is feasible and appropriate across the different programs, taking into account their specific objectives and context. And I personally would also say we need to caution against approaches that are too strict or too detailed, as they could reduce the flexibility needed for the effective implementation.
We need to bear in mind what this new approach is all about. It's about a modernized and flexible budget, and we need to bring also our ideas and specialized committees together with this, you know, overall idea. Otherwise, it wouldn't make sense to leave this program structure. And that is extremely difficult to do because we are from all committees that they have, you know, very specific criticism towards the proposals of framework regulation. So on the proposed introduction of additional spending targets, I would underline that we need to preserve especially this flexibility of the EU budget also as a parliament, and avoid excessive earmarking that could limit the effectiveness of the program.
Again, then why are we doing this? This excessive earmarking is against the general idea of this commission's proposal. It's also important to ensure that the overall performance framework remains coherent, comparable, and streamlined so that it, in the end, is really a simplification. Maybe two more general words for us as a parliament, I think we are concerned that very important issues such as the guidance on the do not significant harm principle will be defined solely by the commission. We are concerned that specific climate targets will be defined via a delegated act.
So this all could be seen as a very incoherent legislative drafting since, for example, the climate targets were included in the sectoral regulation, now the sectoral funds will have to abide by some targets which are defined elsewhere. So that is very important to bear in mind. Again, we are both looking forward to your contribution, and I would also encourage a balanced approach that strengthens gender equality while also ensuring that the framework remains effective and fit for the purpose that it's meant for.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Thank you very much both of you for your work and for being here. And now, I will pass on the floor to the shadow reporters, starting by EPP, Giusepinci. The floor is yours.
Giusi Princi
Thank you. Thank you very much, Chair. I'll speak Italian. Firstly, I'd like to thank you as the rapporteur on this file for the work you've done. Without doubt, it really mainstreams the gender dimension in the financial framework.
For the EPP, as Nicholas was saying, this file is an opportunity to strengthen the quality of the European Union's work. A modern budget shouldn't just be assessed in terms of the resources that it allocates, but especially for the results that it creates, especially with regards to gender equality. And this is what our amendments are doing. Traceability has to have reliable data that can be gender disaggregated and clear, coherent indicators per program and a clear link between the objective, spending, and the results. Without that basis, we risk creating a formal framework that doesn't really implement policies.
At the same time, it's important that gender mainstreaming be effective and proportionate. This means applying gender mainstreaming in a targeted way, focusing on those programs in which the impact is real and measurable. A uniform or blanket approach could actually increase red tape without creating added value. So for that reason, we support the development of a stronger operational methodology in line with international standards, such as through the OECD and the oversight of the European Court of Auditors. Furthermore, it's important that the traceability system is one of the or supports the political priorities for women's rights and the strategy for gender equality 26 30.
The point for us is clear. We want a system that really works, that allows us to see where results are being created and better allocate resources, and to improve the quality of European expenditure without bringing on new bureaucratic burdens. As such, the EPP is ready and willing to work constructively to further shore up the text, improve the results of European Union policies, with consideration of gender equality. Thank you.
Thank.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
Thank you very much, madam chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, we were worried about the commission's approach regarding the horizontal principles in areas such as climate and gender because it seems to represent narrow interests and selective interpretation, and they're applied in no way. The draft continues to worsen this approach. It continues to add coefficients, categories, and more margin for arbitrary decisions. We're talking about a budget instrument that should offer clarity, comparability, and legal certainty, and the opposite is happening.
It's bringing in ideology, subjective criteria, and unreliable quantification. How can you rigorously qualify something based on such open and debatable concepts that don't have social support even within this house? We have broad experience in the kind of waste at play in gender funds. It hasn't managed to reduce what violence goes for minutes and increased, and it hasn't improved women's living conditions. You yourself admit this when you say that you're disappointed in our achievements.
It doesn't work. However, we're still trying to expand it. The concept of equality between men and women in the treaties is not synonymous with what we call gender equality here. Under this umbrella term, you are using it to treat all citizens the same, which creates a battle between men and women. Those who are promoting this vision don't see anything good about women and what being a woman means, for example, being a mother.
And if they are fighting to level the playing field and not true equality. If we want to improve the lives of women, let's start by appreciating their identity and recognizing their very important contribution to society. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Yes. ECR, I don't see anyone here. Renew, Raquel, are you on to Raquel Garcia, Remida Sandervala. The floor is yours.
Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle
Thank you. I will be speaking for our shadow rapporteur, Abid Al Salani, who also could not be here today. So on behalf of Abir, thank you, chair, for this draft, which goes a long way towards improving the commission's proposal. We have already had several discussions in this committee regarding the structure of this proposal, and I think there are some common ideas among many of us here in terms of what needs to be improved in order to use this regulation, not just for tracking budget expenditure on gender equality, but to ensure results and impact. Gender equality must never be a checklist to be ticked off, or a dimension we add on after the budget has been distributed to other priorities.
Raquel, thank you. I am happy to see that you propose to anchor the femme opinion also to the commission's roadmap for women's rights. One of this committee's role is to make sure that any opinions and reports that pass through here make use of and references to the existing commitments to gender equality already made. And I think we can all agree that the roadmap is an important tool that needs to be firmly grounded in real legislation like this one. Further, I appreciate the additions and expansions on gender budgeting, gender mainstreaming, and including the whole budgeting life cycle.
It is not enough to measure gender equality spending after the fact. We must carefully plan to include it in all budget programs and activities from the beginning. Finally, thank you for also including additional indicators in Annex one and for deleting the very narrow and selective list of programs that have to mainstream gender equality. It is my firm belief that the European budget in 2026 must have a thoroughly gender mainstreamed budget across all policy fields and all programs. We will propose further indications, particularly in EU external action, migration and border and borders and democracy and rights.
Thank you. And, chair, may I add something from me as a rapporteur for the Reggie opinion, also in charge of gender mainstreaming? Thank you so much. I would like to precise two things. You mentioned the 12% tracked expenditure on gender equality.
Just for you to know this, but everyone to know that's a very optimistic way of looking at it. If you look at the things that have really contributed in a very measurable way to gender equality, 6%. So I also agree that we should elevate the level of ambition and we should have a clear gender equality goal in the budget, not only to track it, but also to know what we are working towards. So I would like to support that. I would also like to remind all of us and especially the co-rapporteurs, and this is something that I have mentioned before in other meetings, that, yes, every committee has their, well, their preferences.
But there are only two horizontal principles in our budget, and that's climate and biodiversity, and gender equality. There are no other horizontal principles that are supposed to be present throughout the actions of the European Union. So I do believe that gender equality deserves a treatment which is much closer to that of climate and biodiversity, and not the way that we are doing it right now. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. From the Greens, I don't see anyone left. I don't know if, Carolina, oh yeah. Thank.
Carolina Morace
you. Well, this regulation might seem to be very technical, but it's very political because this is how we're going to monitor European spending and indicate our priorities. We need to make them visible, and we need to be able to correct them as well. So I welcome very positively the aim of simplifying and harmonizing the performance framework for the European budget, but simplification must not weaken the gender mainstreaming. If we want to have a consistent budget for equality, we need to be able to trace it and assess it in a good way.
We're seeing that there are these disaggregated indicators for gender, and we also need to have that for education, culture, and migration. That's a basis here, but that should not be limited to just simple single sectors. So we think that the opinion needs to stress that we need stronger objectives when it comes to disaggregated gender data. We need to have more transparency through the single gateway, and we need to have a gender scoring methodology that's more solid. The European budget shouldn't just be spending resources, but it should also show who benefits, who is being left behind, and how we can contribute to quality.
Lina Gálvez
I'd say I don't see anyone from ESN. So any other members that have not spoken want to take the floor? Yeah. Gabriela Gerseny from the EPP. Thank you very much, madam Chair.
Gabriella Gerzsenyi
I will speak again in Hungarian. Thank.
Thank you to the shadow rapporteurs for the work that you've done on this. Josipinci has already presented the EPP position. So I'm here as a Hungarian woman and a Hungarian member of parliament, and I will comment in that role. Yes. This must be a basic principle when it comes to gender equality, and we need to have the desegregated data on gender.
That should help to improve transparency when it comes to spending, and it should better monitor corruption. It should also offer better access to funding. What we do need to pay attention to is, as we've heard, that flexibility should not happen at the cost of effectiveness. The budget needs to keep certain labels, and we need to keep an eye on this to make sure that this is understood in all member states. We need to make sure that we also reduce administrative burden in the member states, and we need to simplify life for the beneficiaries.
Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Thank you. Anyone else wanting to take the floor? If not, I will give the floor back to me as rapporteur from pharma. So, thank you. Thank you very much also to the rapporteurs from Batch and Ankond for your work and also the colleagues from the different political groups.
I think we all want a good budget, a good methodology to track the expenditure, because at the end, it really shows which are our priorities, and the idea that we need a feasible and simple budget because normally, there is much bureaucracy. But the budget should show our priorities, and I would like to remind that gender equality is in our treaties, is in our core values. And so we cannot put as a horizontal principle gender equality if we are not translating that into the budget. This is very important because we are doing that with our other horizontal principle, but not within the budgeting. So we are less is what that means.
This is also very dangerous because if we put that on the paper, we will have people saying that gender equality policies have failed. And that is very dangerous for our democracies, and this is very dangerous for the European project. And we have listened that today in this room, and we are listening every day that gender equality is not functioning. It is not working. Obviously, if we are putting just gender equality on paper but not really producing the tools and the budget to really advance on gender equality, the regulation, the policies really to advance gender equality, at the end, we are giving arguments to the ones that are denying that we should look for gender equality, that this is a core principle.
So this is very dangerous. It's we're really do not write. This is democratically very dangerous because I remind that equality is a core principle for our democracies. And we cannot really allow that we are not equal. That no.
We are equal. We are born equal in rights. So sorry for becoming very philosophical here, but I think it is also very important. And also because gender equality is also linked in a more material way to some of our main goals right now in the union, which is competitiveness. In most European countries, women are 60% of people with university degrees, apart from the fact that we are 10 million more people.
But apart from that, we are having more human capital. However, we don't have the same opportunities, not in the labour market. I will not mention at home that it is the most unequal share of unpaid work, not on decision making, not even in this parliament where we are below 40% of MEPs. So if we really want competitiveness, we really need to give opportunities to everyone. Talents are equally spread.
Opportunities are not. And in order to improve our opportunities, we need the budget well done and we really need to evaluate and to see to track where this money is going. It's very important for demography because contrary to what it had been said that we will recover our demography if we are back home just to have babies. We will have more babies if we are more equal. This is scientific evidence.
It's not me saying it. It's scientific evidence. And, of course, we will also have a better democracy and probably a better union. So please, let's work all together in fitting very well this tracking methodology for budget making gender equality a reality and not only something that we put on paper because that could be also feeding the backlash on gender equality and the backlash on democracy, in general. So this is the last point.
Sorry? Deadline for amendments. So, yes, you're right. So the deadline for amendments is on May 7 at noon, I guess. Yes.
So, thank you. Thank you very much, and we will come back at 03:00, for the rest of today's committee. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you to the interpreters.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
I've been referred to on many occasions. Could I respond?
Lina Gálvez
Other people were referred to, too. I'm sorry, Margarita. Don't think there were any direct references. There was a debate on ideas, but there was no specific mention or direct mention of you as a person. So, as it was a debate of ideas, I think they did refer to me.
Well, Margarita, as the person who defended a number of ideas, they have left, and I didn't ask for the floor at the time, but I did ask for it five minutes ago. So I think I should be given the opportunity. I'm sorry. The other members have left. We've closed the meeting.
If I had noticed in time, I would have given it to you. Maybe at the beginning of the next meeting? Yes. If the members are present, then yes. We can.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.