english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Αρχική arrow newsitems arrow CoE Experts to EF on Social Charter compared to Other Tools v. Poverty (Basic Income, US MedicAid +)

CoE Experts to EF on Social Charter compared to Other Tools v. Poverty (Basic Income, US MedicAid +)

Έχει γραφτεί από ACM
Τετάρτη, 24 Ιανουάριος 2018

 coe_social_charter_rapporteur_chemlas_reply_to_agg_question_eurofora_400


*Strasbourg/CoE/Angelo Marcopolo/- Some First, but Interesting Comparisons between CoE's PanEuropean Social Charter and Other Tools to Fight against Poverty Today, (as Basic Income, USA's MedicAid, etc), started to be made during the Annual Press Conference for the Year 2017, thanks to the Replies given to relevant "Eurofora"'s Questions by the President of the European Committee of Social Rights, Giuseppe Palmisano, and its General Rapporteur, Eliane Chemla.

 

coes_annual_press_conference_on_social_rights_eurofora_400


The main Focus of this January 2018 CoE's Press Conference on Social throughout more than 33 European Countries,, was about Medical Assistance, and Protection against Poverty/Social Exclusion, together with Social Welfare, Social Protection of Elderly People, etc.

--------------------------

 

aggs_questions_to_coes_press_conference_on_social_rights_eurofora_screenshot_em_400 


- Initially, "Eurofora" asked President Palmisano's view about the Topical Issue of "Basic Citizens Income", on which CoE's Parliamentary Assembly had just Debated and Voted a new Report, Yesterday in Strasbourg, after several quite "Hot" Exchanges, and in the middle of a Strong Controversy.

----------------------------------------------

coe_social_rights_ctee_president_palmisanos_reply_eurofora_screenshot_400


- Palmisano's first reaction was quite Positive, welcoming, in substance, a tool like the Basic Citizens' Income that CoE's Assembly had just Adopted, as another tool which could Respond to several Needs covered by the Social Charter, and provide some Satisfactory Answers in real Practice.

coe_socoam_charter_president_palmisano_reply_to_agg_question_1_eurofora_400


- But, at the same time, he carefully added that, in fact, such a move wasn't always absolutely Necessary, since CoE's Social Charter was, in his view, able to Meet many among those Needs also by Different Mechanisms, according to its own prescriptions.

 

__________________________


+ More Complex appeared, a priori, anOther Topical comparative Question raised by "Eurofora", (this time to the General Rapporteur, Eliane Chemla), about the European Social Charter's "Right to Medical Assistance", etc., and the well-known current "Hot" Debate in the USA on "MedicAid", in the Wider Context of Attempts to Reform the American "MediCare" System in general, (similar to Europe's "Social Security" and/or "Right to Protecion of Health", etc:

 

coe_social_charter_rapporteur_chemlas_reply_to_agg_question_eurofora_400_01


- Initially, Chemla focused on a rather Classical Distinction between a very Different European Model of Social Security, and an American one, much more related to Private schemas, estimating that the respective situations would be beyond any comparison, on those key points.


>>> But, interestingly, when she Discussed with "Eurofora", Later-on, in more concrete details, a Comparison between USA's "MedicAid" and CoE's "Socio-Medical Assistance", including "Social Protection" for the "Elderly" (a very Topical Issue Nowadays even in Germany, it seems, but Similar to what exists in the USA since the Late 1960ies), and/or USA's "Food-Stumps" compared to CoE's wider "Protection against Poverty", etc., Chemla appeared more Thoughtfull :


- Indeed, her subsequent estimation was, in substance, that what exists in Europe, but not yet in the USA, was an Elementary Right to Social Security in general, which helped also prevent risks of extreme poverty in this regard. But, in Fact, when it really came to cases of real Extreme Poverty and/or Social Exclusion risks, the situation did Not necessarily seem to be so Radically Different between CoE's and USA's relevant tools, as some hasty comparisons used to claim...


=> In Conclusion, CoE's Social Rights' General Rapporteur agreed with "Eurofora" that, Nowadays, a Serious and concrete Comparative Analysis between various Different Approaches of the common but MultiFacet Fight against Poverty, had become Necessary and useful, in order to Better Clarify the real Situations, Choose the more Efficient Solutions, in full Knowledge of the main Facts.

- Sometimes, there might be certain Unexpected "Surprises", at First Sight, as, f.ex., the Fact that a so  Important European Country as Germany, has Not yet Ratified CoE's "Collective Complaints" Procedure, for the Protection of Social Rights, while, on the Contrary, several Less Rich and Powerfull European Countries have already done so, as President Palmisano critically observed, in Reply to anOther Question by a German Collegue Journalist, during that same Annual 2018 Press Conference in Strasbourg...

 

(../..)


----------------------------------------


***


(NDLR : "DraftNews", as already send to "Eurofora"s Subscribers/Donors, Earlier. A more accurate, full Final Version, might be Published asap).


***


Multi-lingual Interface

Statistics

Επισκέπτες: 27224543

Archive

Login Form





Να με θυμάσαι

Ξεχάσατε τον Κωδικό Πρόσβασης;
Δεν έχετε λογαριασμό ακόμα; Δημιουργία λογαριασμού

Syndicate

RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
OPML

  imag0573_400

    An "Eugenic" loophole Amendment, which might expose to Dangers reminiscent of "3rd Reich's" notorious Genetic Abuses, hidden at the last minute inside an otherwise Good, larger Health policy Package scheduled to be voted on Thursday, was strongly denounced by a coalition of MEPs from various Political Groups and Countries, in a Press Conference held this afternoon at EU Parliament in Strasbourg.

    Mainly calling to "Select Human Embryos", via "Genetic Counselling" and "pre-implantation" Techniques including "Genetic Tests", in order to "Eradicate Hereditary rare Diseases", it might open ways to Dangerous Practices in Future, they denounced in substance.

    But they also made it clear that a much larger Report inside which this Controversial Amendment "No 15" was added in dubious circumstances, officialy destinated to struggle against "Rare Diseases", and drafted by Professor Antonios Trakatellis, was otherwise "an Excellent Report", aiming at a "completely Uncontroversial target" of Health policy on which "all MEPs and Experts are united, believing that Europe should act" to protect People's Health (See "EuroFora"'s earlier News).

    The controversy came at a particularly delicate moment for the EU in relation to Citizens, at the eve of June 2009 EU Elections, and shortly before Ireland re-votes for "Lisbon Treaty"..    

- Denouncing risks of "an Eugenic demand, very similar to what we had during the 3rd Reich in Germany, but now coming from some Scientisists themselves", German ChristianDemocrat/EPP MEP Dr. Peter Liese stressed that critical MEPs were against "Eugenic" engineering with "Selection of Human Embryos", and anything which might ultimately lead up to to a "Selection of Human Race". It doesn't help to "eradicate" Human Lives, he added.


    Several Experts and NGOs expressed "Deep Concern", as f;ex. DR M.C. Cornel of the "European Society of Human Genetics", which stressed, on this occasion, that "the importance of Non-Directiveness in Reproductive issues is a Central characteristic of Human Genetics, after the Atrocities committed in the name of Genetics in the first half or the 20th Century".

     - "This is completely Unacceptable", stressed Italian Liberal MEP Vittorio Prodi, on the Controversial Amendment, also because pushes to "eliminate early Human Life", as he noted.

     - "This opens a Dangerous Road, rather a Motorway", denounced Danish MEP Mrs Margrette Auken, from the "Greens", observing that various similar attempts were made in the Past "not only in Germany, but also in several other Countries, "even at the 1970ies", "f.ex. on forced Sterilisation of Roma" People, and other criticisable situations f.ex. in the UK, in Sweden, etc. as she said.

    + Other NGOs, as f.ex. "LebenHilfe" from Berlin, added that, among various other Risks, could also be that, by exploiting the pre-implantation Genetic Diagnostics and the Selection of "healthy" Embryos, some may "propagate" several "Eugenic" aims, starting f.ex. by pushing to eradicate Human Livies which might "Cost too much" to preserve, ultimately exposing to dangers reminiscent of the "3rd Reich"'s atrocious abuses.

    In consequence, ChristianDemocrats/EPP and "Green" MEPs "decided by Majority to vote against" this Controversial Amendment, anounced to Journalists the 5 MEPs who participated in the Press Conference, representing a wide spectrum, from Liberals to "Greens" and ChristianDemocrats, and from Hungary, Italy, Germany and Danemark up to Ireland (Gay Mitchell), etc.
----------------------------------
    Hungarian ChristianDemocrat MEP Laszlo Surjan said "that it was "Suddenly, at the End of the Procedure" in Committee, that "appeared this (Controversial) Amendment, which has nothing to do" with the main purpose of the Report, on which all agreed.

    He denounced an "Unhonest" move, and called to "avoid this kind of unacceptable situations". Nobody should "Select People", Surjan stressed.

    - "We (MEPs) had No Chance to Discuss" this last-minute Amendment earlier added at a Committee's level, said German MEP Peter Liese

    Speaking to "EuroFora", Dr. Liese, the Spokesman of the ChristianDemocrat/EPP Group in EU Parliament, said that MEPs didn't oppose other references of the Report f.ex. on "Genetic Tests", because they were "no proposals" to impose them, while, on the contrary, there was "a Problem" if anyone attempted to "impose" f.ex. this or that Genetic Technique and "Genetic Counselling", etc. to the People on human reproduction.
-------------
The precise Text :
-----------------
    Controversial parts of Amendment No 15 ask mainly "to lead finally to the Eradication" of "Hereditary" "rare diseases", "through Genetic Counselling .., and ..pre-Implantation Selection of healthy Embryos".

    But  EU Rapporteur Professor Trakatellis, said to "EuroFora" that fears should be alleviated by Guarantees that all this should be done only "where appropriate", when it's "not contrary to existing National Law", and "always on a Voluntary basis", according to other Parts of the Amendment.

    He stressed that the main aim was to allow "a free and informed choice of persons involved", without imposing them anything :  - "It's not an obligatory, but advisary" text, he said.

    To make that point clear, he was ready, in agreement with many MEPs, to eventually drop at least that part of the controversial Amendment which initially called for "efforts to ..lead finally to the Eradication of those rare diseases" "which are Hereditary".

    But, until late Wednesday evening, reportedly together with many other MEPs, he stood by all the rest of the controversial Amendment, (fex. on the "Genetic Counselling" and the "pre-implantation Selection of healthy Embryos"), so that critical MEPs, going from ChristianDemocrats as Dr. Liese, to "Greens" or "Ind/Dem", observed to "EuroFora" that "this was not enough" to close the dangerous loophole.

    Particularly since, as Professor Trakatellis noted himself, "this is already allowed to the U.K.", and "other National Legislations would probably follow, sooner or later" in a similar direction. As for a general call to "Eradicate Hereditary rare Diseases", this "should happen, at any case, in practice, de facto", to protect public Health.

    On the contrary, "our goal should be to help patients suffering from rare diseases, not to eradicate the patients. In case of genetic disease risk, the decision should not be guided by scenarios" made by politicians. "Perents who may decide to accept a child, even if handicapped or with genetic disease, must be respected and supported with solidarity", critical MEPs stated.

    - "Any Pressure" to "a patient or couple (who "should be able to make an informed choice consistent with their own values"),"from health Professionals, Public Health Policies or Governemental Institutions, or Society at large, should be avoided", stresses the "European Society for Human Genetics".

----------------------------------

Each MEP's vote will be registered !

-----------------------------------   

The Socialist Group requested a "Split vote" on the Amendment 15, first without, and afterwards with the words "lead finally to the Eradication" etc.


    But the first "split vote" leaves intact all the other parts of the Controversial Amendment, (i.e. "Genetic Counselling", "Selection of healthy Embryos", etc).

    That's why, 3 Groups of MEPs : ChristianDemocrats/EPP, "Greens/EFA", and "Ind/Dem", have asked for "Roll Call Votes", on everything regarding the Controversial Amendment No 15, and on the final outcome of the resulting Report as amended, which will register all the individual positions to be taken by each MEP.   

Something which will obviously make each MEP think twice before voting for one or another choice, to be sure that he/she will make the right choice in front of EU Citizens, particularly at these pre-Election times...


    Crucial Votes were scheduled between 12 Noon and 1 p.m. local Strasbourg time, in the middle of a long series of various other Reports, and after a long Public Debate on the larger Health policy package, from 9 to 11.50 am.

    The specific Report inside which was hidden the controversial Amendment is due to be debated between 11 and 12 am.

    So that more last-minute Surprises may not be excluded a priori...

    Particularly at the present Historic moment, when even the Institutional Future of the EU depends on the result of a second Referendum on "Lisbon Treaty", later this year, in ...Ireland, a mainly Catholic country, where People are particularly sensitive in such kind of socio-cultural and values issues...
 

      ***     
 
     (Draft due to be updated).
 
***

Polls

2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?

Αποτελέσματα

SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.