Debate contributions by Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

I start by thanking my colleagues, because you are giving me an opportunity to exchange views with you on a topic that you know I am very concerned about: Thank you for this opportunity. Do you realize, Irene, the social impact of abortion legislation like the one that exists in Spain? What message are we conveying to society, to children, to women, when we point to fertility as a problem, when we point to pregnancy as a problem? It's closing his arms, it's telling him: You are not welcome. I want a society that embraces life, that celebrates life, that celebrates women's fertility, not that is against women.

When a woman's life is at stake, no one questions that there is a decision in that regard. I don't know exactly all the details of what happened there. But when there is a risk to a woman's life, Polish law provides for such a situation. If you would like to collaborate with medical professionals, who are tried to be set aside, who are not even given the freedom of conscience... In hospitals, medical advice is usually given and that medical advice requires the deliberation of more than one health professional and among those professionals. In Poland, whether abortion is protected when a woman's life is at risk depends on a medical decision made in a hospital. With my colleagues here in the European Parliament I have had the opportunity to visit Poland and see what I say.

I think a woman's right is to be protected in her pregnancy, to be able to welcome her baby. We know that where there are permissive legislations, where there is the simple proposal of abortion, the woman feels pushed to abort. I do not see you concerned about this situation of women, which is a real discrimination: that a woman cannot take her children because of a complicated economic situation or lack of emotional support, often from a man, or because she has to avoid seeing a pregnancy after an aggression. I don't see them concerned about those situations where abortion is being imposed in some way. The simple proposition of abortion puts pressure on women. Women want to be protected, they want to be welcomed, they want to be able to say "welcome" to their baby.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the conclusions of the United Nations regarding Poland and its legislation on abortion are very worrying. They represent a clear interference in the sovereignty of a country to impose an agenda that violates the most fundamental right: the right to life. There is no right to abortion. They invoked a 1979 convention on discrimination against women that made no mention of it at all. It is a shame that the United Nations believes that it can demand from States legislative changes contrary to its own Constitutions, that references be invented, that they try to manipulate cases where women's lives are at risk. It's not these women they're worried about. Be clear: They seek free abortion, without assumptions or deadlines. Polish law is an example of engagement with the most vulnerable: the unborn child and its mother. Don't pretend to confront them. Legislation in other states, increasingly permissive to abortion, promotes the abandonment of pregnant women, who are not offered alternatives and are pressured into this irreversible and dramatic decision. Abortion is a failure. Although they want to disguise it as a health service, it is contrary to the vocation of doctors to heal and care. It is incomprehensible that they are being pushed to act contrary to this principle. Where will the doctor's trust be with the patient? I call on the United Nations to restore the original meaning of human rights, where the right to life and the dignity of the person are unquestionable.

Mr President, Commissioner Schinas, ladies and gentlemen, 11 million children and adolescents suffer from mental health problems in the European Union. Suicide is one of the leading causes of death between the ages of 15 and 29. It's very worrying. What are we doing wrong? Why are our young people losing the illusion for life and suffering? We are facing many changes that can affect us. Family, which plays a crucial role in emotional stability, seems to have lost its social value. Do you know the difficulties we have to overcome when we have not enjoyed a childhood of security and trust? Let us also think about the confusion that is often promoted around identity. How can they find their place in the world if they are made to doubt who they are? Loneliness, addictions, hypersexualization, coexistence with the digital world: These and many other issues need to be analysed in depth in order to give young people the future they need.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I understand that abortion harms women and that women should receive support and alternatives. But here it has been said that maintaining a pro-life stance is intolerable and that such speeches should not be allowed. My way of thinking is not accepted in this House. Moreover, they point to all those who think like me as aggressors of human rights. Many of you would take me out of this House because of the way I think. I'm accused of being an extremist. So what do you suggest? Do I cease to exist so as not to disturb them? Freedom of conscience, thought and religion are being violated in Europe against those of us who do not assume the single thought they want to impose on us.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, today we are concerned about the women of Iraq; at the previous plenary session, those of Afghanistan; And Iran, how are the women there in Iran? What or who legitimizes assaults on women? Who forces them to cover their body and face? Who forces girls to marry at age nine? We all know that. Ladies and gentlemen, in Iraq, in 2021, 22% of unregistered marriages were already of girls under the age of 14. Now, of course, it looks like it's going to get worse. But in Catalonia, Spain, in 2023, the number of women and girls subjected to forced marriages increased by 20%. Faced with this, one cannot remain ignorant and deny the threat posed by the advance of Islamic radicalism in the world. It is for the safety of everyone, everyone, but especially women. It is an enormous irresponsibility to appeal to an alleged cultural respect to admit violations of human rights. It is time to remove the complex and truly defend women, both in Iraq and in Europe.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, last Thursday, the CUP registered in Catalonia a proposal for a law on the effectiveness of the right to abortion that proposes to eliminate the deadlines – that is, that it be possible to have an abortion at any time –, to allow 12-year-old girls to have an abortion without their parents’ consent and to prohibit the conscientious objection of doctors and nurses. Unfortunately, the line taken last term in this House is already inspiring initiatives like this. Do you realise what it means in practice to eliminate deadlines? How many of you would have the cold blood to end a child's life the day before they were born? I don't know if I'm naive, but I don't think they're capable. However, that is the pure reality behind beautiful words and supposed women's rights. They're not rights. They are a trap that leaves us totally unprotected until we reject those we love the most: our children. I ask you, please, to reflect. We now have a chance to turn the tide. Women are sources of love and life for our society. Let us offer alternatives that allow us to have a horizon of hope.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, I thank the Afghan women who have accompanied us and courageously offered us their testimony: We're with you. The recently adopted law on the prevention of vice in Afghanistan blatantly violates women's most basic human rights, attacks their dignity and seeks to alienate them from society. We all agree on this, don't we? However, it is incomprehensible that while this House is supposedly condemning the adoption of this rule, it is at the same time promoting the importation of these cultural practices into Europe. In Spain, France or Germany it is already common to see women on the street completely covered with a niqab. Do you think that dressing like this is the only obligation imposed by the Islamic fundamentalism that we are denouncing today? It would be naive not to recognise that the freedom and dignity of these women is already under attack in Europe. If you don't want these denigrating customs in countries like Afghanistan, why are you here? It is hypocrisy, an incoherence that legitimizes the practices that fundamentalist regimes are imposing on the population, thus completely unprotecting women from them. In addition, the European Union is also complicit when it is not clear or when it supports radical Islamists for political interests who, as in Afghanistan, Iran or Gaza, attack the dignity of their people. Can one condemn what one practices? The European institutions have shown that they have no judgement in this regard. In fact, they themselves act abusively, imposing here a unique model of thinking that does not even allow us to be critical of these practices. Europe must continue to rely on the Christian values that inspired the European project in order to remain the beacon that the world needs. Don't let us bring to Europe what we don't want to see in Kabul.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission can continue to applaud itself as much as it wants for the management of COVID-19 and for vaccines, but the reality is that if they take to the streets they will see how people have lost confidence in the institutions. We would all like to forget what we experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, but we cannot. We must not let the same mistakes happen again: a disproportionate restriction of freedoms, and impositions using health as a pretext. We are concerned about the drift that the management of monkey pox by international institutions may take with the approval of the European Union: lack of transparency, vaccines and more vaccines, lack of scientific criteria, diminishing the sovereignty of nations... In this regard, we denounce the amendments to the International Health Regulations that were adopted last June by the World Health Organization and which redefines the concept of emergency and introduces a clause that seriously undermines national sovereignty. It is a grave irresponsibility to shatter the principle of subsidiarity: It exposes us to the risk of being left in the hands of international bodies that may not look out for our interests. We need first to restore trust in the institutions, that there is legal certainty with a framework of competence that does not allow the serious attacks on the democratic order and freedom that we suffered during the COVID-19 pandemic to reoccur.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, after our insistence on the previous mandate, the obvious is now recognised: the policies imposed by the European Union have led to the paralysis and destruction of businesses and jobs. It is impossible to create initiatives, we are no longer a reference in innovation. That's your responsibility. Those who survive today do so by falling victim to a system of subsidies and swallowing up ideological agendas. The logical thing would have been to start the mandate by correcting the line and making the objectives more flexible. But no, you come back with the same thing. The Green Deal – incompatible with competitiveness – is maintained and they are satisfied that there is this debate, that the Draghi Report is published... This isn't enough. The situation is very serious. It is necessary to correct, stop tripping over the same stone. It is time to move from words to deeds. For our companies to be competitive again we need to give wings to talent, remove barriers, reduce regulations and abandon, once and for all, absurd ideological goals that benefit no one but some of you.