Victory at UN Commission on Population and Development

-->

The first week in April was not a good week for UNFPA, the UN Population Fund which was first given the news at the outset of its conference, the Commission on Population and Development, that the Trump Administration had decided to withdraw funding of  around $75 million on the basis that UNFPA’s activities in China are complicit with that nation’s coercive population control program, the implementation of which includes forced abortion and involuntary sterilization.

The UNFPA problems continued later that week with a firm rejection of the anti life and family policies they and other UN organs are attempting to impose globally.  The outcome of the Commission on Population and Development (CPD) was in fact a significant victory by pro-life and family forces and was the second time in three years that the Commission failed to produce an outcome document.

The 50th session of the Commission held at UN headquarters in New York, was themed, ‘Changing population age structures and sustainable development’. This was the first CPD since the Trump Administration took office in the US and was viewed by UNFPA and their anti-life allies, such as International Planned Parenthood (IPPF), as a testing ground to establish the direction the administration would take when faced with demands for the acceptance of controversial language on sexual and reproductive rights and comprehensive sexuality education for children.

In recent years the negotiating strategy adopted by Western governments has been to insert many references to controversial issues in documents during the negotiating period and rely on the chair to issue a compromise text which inevitably retains some of those issues.

In this case the outcome document was similarly loaded up with controversial language and when the chair’s text was circulated early on Friday morning it was completely unacceptable. Negotiations continued all day Friday and a so called compromise text was produced by the Qatar Chair, Ambassador Alya Ahmed Al Thani, which in the end failed to satisfy either side leaving her with no option for her but to withdraw the text.

The decision by the chair to withdraw the document was enthusiastically welcomed by pro-life and pro-family NGO’s but was greeted with a shocked silence and anger by the anti-life and family brigade when the realisation sunk in that there would not be an outcome document and that their plans for sexualising children had been stopped.

One of the most poignant interventions was made by the Russian Federation’s delegate who told the meeting that pushing sexual and reproductive health rights as indivisible from human rights was nothing but an attempt to undermine international agreements on human rights.  Such formulations, he said, diluted basic human rights, which only discredited the Commission’s work.

 He also expressed opposition to use of the Commission as a “back door” through which to force various human rights concepts that did not meet the broader consensus.

Babatunde Osotimehin, Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), expressed regret that the Commission had been unable to reach consensus on its outcome document for the second time adding that it was clearly a challenging time for the Commission. As population age structures changed, commitment to improving the lives of women and girls was becoming increasingly important, he said, and he urged all Member States to continue their funding of UNFPA so as to restore its core budget.

ESTRELA REPORT: UPDATE

The controversial Estrela report, which was referred back to the Women’s Rights and Gender Equality Committee of the European Parliament (FEMM) has once again been adopted by that committee with only minor cosmetic changes and has been placed back on the plenary agenda for December 10.

This controversial report on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights, promotes a right to abortion and also includes compulsory sex education for toddlers.

The Estrela Report was referred back to the FEMM committee following an intense debate about its controversial content, which includes not only the promotion of abortion and a call for restrictions on conscientious objection but also urges compulsory sexual education for children aged 0-4 onwards. (For example, children should be informed about “enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s own body”, “early childhood masturbation”, etc.)

Debate in the FEMM Committee meeting was heated and opponents of the report complained about a possible breach of the Parliament‘s legal procedure because an outright ban that was placed on tabling new amendments or discussing the existing an alternative resolution which had been prepared.

Although Mrs. Angelika Niebler MEP (EPP) requested to postpone the vote on the Report until the European Parliament‘s Legal Service or Constitutional Affairs Committee (AFCO) could be asked for an official opinion on the legality of the amendment ban, the Report‘s proponents argued that there was no need to further delay the vote. This push for a vote received surprising support from shadow rapporteur Michèle Striffler, a member of the conservative European People's Party (EPP) Group in the European Parliament, who agreed with the text of the Report, along with other coordinators.

The proposal to wait for informed legal opinion on the amendment ban was rejected, and the Estrela Report was adopted with 19 MEPs voting in favor of it and 15 against.

Most of the proposed amendments were rejected, but some minor changes were adopted, the changes being only in detail but not in substance, as follows: 

• The paragraph calling on EU Member States “to ensure compulsory, age-appropriate and gender-sensitive sexuality and relationship education for all children and adolescents (both in and out of school)” (§15), was amended to exclude the phrase“both in and out of school”. The word “compulsory” however still remains.

• The paragraph that reads “sexuality education must be provided in a safe, taboo-free, interactive atmosphere between students and educators” (§44), was changed to exclude the words “taboo-free”, “interactive” and “between students and educators”.

• The paragraph which reads  “emphasises, therefore, that sexuality education must be part of a broader supportive approach to young people’s emotional development so as to enable them to form mutually respectful relationships with members of the opposite sex” (§54) was amended by the exclusion of the phrase, “with members of the opposite sex”.

These amendments do not improve the report in any way, they are simply cosmetic changes. The vast majority of the radical language and proposals of the Estrela Report remain in place.

The Report has now been put on the agenda for a plenary vote in Parliament on December 10th at 11:30 a.m.

Although it’s a non-binding report, adoption of the Estrela Report would express the official opinion of the European Parliament on the matter of abortion, sexual education and conscientious objection. In each of these areas, the Report adopts a radical position that is at odds with the views of the vast majority of European citizens.

We will return to this issue at the earliest opportunity, as it is imperative that a Community wide lobbying effort should be set in motion to reject this report in plenary on December 10^th.

Action Alert: Estrela Report

We reported on October 22nd that the controversial Estrela report to the European Parliament on “Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights” (SRHR) was referred back to the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM).

We can now report that this controversial report and is to be dealt with by the FEMM committee very swiftly. The report is scheduled to be discussed and voted on, in the Committee next Monday and Tuesday November 25^th and 26^th.

The report and resolution on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights presented by Portugese MEP Edite Estrela, actually represents an assault on parental rights and would undermine the Sovereignty of member states, in that it attempted to make abortion a fundamental human right, remove conscientious objection and introduce pornographic sexuality education even for young children .

The Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the European Community, COMECE, condemned the resolution and pointed out that the EU had no competence in the matter.

The report although presented by Edite Estrella is reported to be the work of  radical NGO’s including the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) in Brussels. 

This was clearly stated by Ms Estrela herself as she thanked NGOs during discussion on the report on the evening prior to the plenary vote. The involvement of IPPF in the preparation of the report was confirmed within the FEMM Committee: IPPF Europe's representative publicly claimed having contributed to the draft report on the very same afternoon it was presented in the FEMM Committee.

The speed at which the report is coming back to the table is surprising given that there are many other reports awaiting attention. Not only has the FEMM Committee put this as the first item on its agenda for its next meeting on November 25^th, but the report and its resolution has also been placed on the draft agenda for the December plenary session

We recommend that readers should in the first instance contact the members of the Femm Committee before next Tuesday and to ask them the following:

• To promote transparency and the public parliamentary debate: the MEPs should be invited to explicitly express a request for amendments to be tabled in the Committee.

Explanation: As the agenda of the Committee stands today there is no room for amendments that could change the content of the report but the report would actually just be debated and then voted. According to the procedure of the European Parliament it is not necessary to make “cosmetic” changes when a report is referred back to its’ committee but the political contents should reflect the different political positions. 

• To vote the alternative resolution: 

This was tabled for the plenary session and therefore cannot be ignored. MEPs should be asked to ensure that the alternative resolution is voted in the Committee.

• Ask for a public vote in the Committee. 

The rules of the European Parliament allow for a nominal vote (roll call vote) in committee (art. 195-3 of the Rules of the European Parliament). A quarter of the voting members, i.e. in this case 9 of the 33 members must support such a request. All members of the Committee, both full members and substitutes can ask for a nominal vote. 

We will return to this issue next week to report on the outcome of the FEMM committee deliberations and with further recommendations.

ESTRELA report ‘a bridge too far’ even for many Socialist and Liberal MEP’s.

In a resounding victory for common sense, following a short but lively debate in the European Parliament, a majority of MEPs voted to refer the highly controversial resolution on the Estrella report back to the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality.

The resolution on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights presented by Portugese MEP Edite Estrela, was an assault on the Sovereignty of member states that attempted to make abortion a fundamental human right, remove conscientious objection and introduce pornographic sexuality education even for young children .

The Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the European Community, COMECE, condemned the resolution and said that the EU had no competence in the matter.

The report although presented by Edite Estrella is reported to be the work of the International Planned Parenthood Federation in Brussels. The fact that the report has been referred back to committee implies, that a revised report cannot not be presented until early next year, thus, limiting the time available to the Parliament to deal with it, prior to the next European elections.

The report and its attack on children proved to be ‘a bridge too far’ even for many Socialist and Liberal MEP’s who may already be looking to their home support bases in their re-election campaigns.