Brussels, 10/04/2014 (Agence Europe) - During the presentation of the One of Us citizens' initiative at the European Parliament on Thursday 10 April, MEPs entered into a truly valuable debate. Although supported by 1.9 million signatures in over 18 EU member states, the initiative promises to be an explosive issue under the next European Parliament, given the daggers that are drawn in debates on it. The initiative requests the end to European funding for both embryonic research and the support of abortion in development aid.
Stormy hearing. For over three hours, four European Parliament committees (legal affairs, research, development and petitions) battled between the arguments of those who support or oppose this initiative, supported by applause from various associations that were following the debate. The controversial citizens' initiative was presented to MEPs for the first time during a hearing - before the European Commission decides at the end of May whether or not to take legislative action on this subject. Patrick Gregor Puppinck, the leader of the citizens' committee, argued in favour of the One of Us initiative, which aims to ban and put an end to the funding of activities that involve the destruction of human embryos - particularly in the areas of research, development aid and public health. This request requires the amendment of European regulations (Horizon 2020 and development cooperation). Starting from the observation that “any human embryo is one of us”, Puppinck asked the European institutions “to respect the human”. “To be able to exploit human embryos for industrial purposes, to be able to limit the demographic growth of a poor country and impose our lifestyle on them are powers that we ask to be limited”, he told MEPs.
Legal basis already set in stone. During the introduction, the rapporteur on the European research programme Horizon 2020, Teresa Riera Madurell (S&D, Spain), recalled that the regulation guaranteed ethical research on embryonic stem cells. European funding for this research can only be given if these studies are authorised at the national level and are in accordance with very strict conditions - “to permit does not mean to constrain”, she summed up. Putting a stop to some of this funding could send research backwards in Europe, she warned, with “the major consequences” that this involves for the EU's competitiveness.
The deputy chair of the European Parliament's legal affairs committee, Françoise Castex (S&D, France) recalled that the legal basis enshrines the principle that “living matter is not patentable”. Research on living matter is therefore patent-free and not in the grip of industrial interests. She noted the ambiguity of the initiative which plays both on the ethics of research on living matter and on abortion and its funding by the EU in developing countries - the only area in which Europe is competent as the member states themselves legislate on sexual and reproductive rights on their territory.
Deep divisions. While the arguments of the One of Us initiative certainly hit the mark with the conservative fringe of the European Parliament, other MEPs were outraged. Sophie in 't Veld (ALDE, Netherlands) said that she would always oppose those who want to cut research funds and women's rights, and she also recalled the high number of Europeans who have not signed the petition. Ana Gomes (S&D, Portugal) wondered about the links of organisations that brought the petition and she criticised the “obscurantism” of the initiative.
Controversy. Several associations, supported by the MEPs, warned European decision-makers of the drifting that come about from an initiative brought by “ultra conservative” groups and “anti-choices movements” (see EUROPE 11056). The associations spoke of real concerns as regards sexual and reproductive rights, women's right to have ownership of their bodies, and the long lasting impact of research on degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, if the initiative made its way in the European institutions.
S&D stands firm. Only the S&D Group took a firm position on the citizens' initiative. The group's leader, Hannes Swoboda from Austria, spoke of his belief in the instrument of the citizens' initiative but said that he feared that in this case the initiative was financed by extremist religious groups and political groups fighting against women's rights and LGBTI rights. “The One of Us proposal risks the life and health of women and children, which we will not accept”, he said during the hearing. He called for “a constructive debate on ethical standards, which cannot be substituted by hateful ideological speeches as we have witnessed today”. (MD)