9. sasaukums Pernando BARRENA ARZA

On 15 June 2021, the Hungarian Parliament voted in favour of amendments proposed by Fidesz MPs that severely restrict freedom of speech and children’s rights. The Law prohibits the ‘portrayal and promotion of gender identity different from sex assigned at birth, the change of sex and homosexuality’ in schools, in television programmes and in publicly available advertisements on any platforms for persons aged under 18, even for educational purposes; the Law disqualifies such content from being considered as a public service announcement or social responsibility advertisement even if intended for adults; the Law introduces amendments to the Child Protection Act, the Family Protection Act, the Act on Business Advertising Activity, the Media Act and the Public Education Act.
I consider this Law to be in breach of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary, in particular the freedom to provide services and freedom of movement of goods as set out in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and E-commerce Directive in conjunction with the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Therefore I voted in favour of the resolution ‘Breaches of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary as a result of the legal changes adopted in the Hungarian Parliament’.

. ‒ I abstained because the outcome of the interinstitutional negotiation is very weak. Even if it sets climate neutrality by 2050, as well as a roadmap and obligations on Member States to adopt adaptation strategies, the outcome is very weak compared to what we endorsed in Parliament in October 2020, which was more ambitious than the Commission proposal thanks to our Group’s pressure. This agreement sets very low targets for 2030, which are insufficient to keep the temperature increase below 1.5ºC as set in the Paris Agreement.
It sets a real reduction target of 52.8% for 2030, compared to the 60% achieved in Parliament’s mandate and the 70% that we have been pushing for from The Left.
Overall, the emission reduction targets aren’t enough and the agreement is very weak taking into account that we are at a point of no return and that ambitious measures, binding goals and policies are needed. However, the outcome achieved is better than nothing, and time is running out; voting against it and sending it back to interinstitutional negotiations would mean delaying the Fit for 2030 package for more than a year, and this could have had an enormous impact on achieving the targets.

I voted to abstain on the technical support instrument since the compromise agreement’s text has not significantly deteriorated compared to the Parliament’s reading as voted previously. I would like also to underline that it is necessary to give technical assistance to the different administrations to tackle the multiple consequences of the COVID-19 crisis and the projects proposed in relation to the ‘New Generation’ funds. Nevertheless, this instrument should not be used as an excuse to prescribe austerity policies through ‘country-specific recommendations’ and the use of the most harmful measures of the European Semester.