AA17CR27

AS (2017) CR 27

2017 ORDINARY SESSION

________________

(Third part)

REPORT

Twenty-seventh sitting

Friday 30 June 2017 at 10 a.m.

In this report:

1.       Speeches in English are reported in full.

2.       Speeches in other languages are reported using the interpretation and are marked with an asterisk

3.        The text of the amendments is available at the document centre and on the Assembly’s website.

      Only oral amendments or oral sub-amendments are reproduced in the report of debates.

4.       Speeches in German and Italian are reproduced in full in a separate document.

5.       Corrections should be handed in at Room 1059A not later than 24 hours after the report has been circulated.

The contents page for this sitting is given at the end of the report.

(Ms Gambaro, Vice-President of the Assembly, took the Chair at 10.15 a.m.)

      The PRESIDENT* – The sitting is open.

1. The “Turin process”: reinforcing social rights in Europe

      The PRESIDENT* – The first item of business this morning is the debate on the report “The ‘Turin process’: reinforcing social rights in Europe”, Document 14343, presented by Ms Bonet on behalf of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development, with an opinion presented by Mr Xuclà on behalf of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy, Document 14370.

      I remind members that speaking time in this debate is limited to four minutes.

      I call Ms Bonet, rapporteur, to present the report. You have 13 minutes in total, which you may divide between presentation of the report and reply to the debate.

      Ms BONET (Andorra) – The Turin process is a good combination: on the one hand, it promotes political commitment and, on the other, it introduces practical measures and tools for improved social rights in Europe. Council of Europe member States continue to face major problems. Many people are unemployed or have difficulty accessing permanent full-time employment, and income inequality is increasing. The number of “working poor” is increasing, and gender pay gaps persist. We should therefore analyse the following: the consequences of the economic crisis and substantial changes in the world of work that have led to an overall deterioration in social rights; the employment situation of young people entering the labour market, who often have to accept non-standard jobs with poor employment and working conditions; and the lack of coherence in the application of European legal frameworks related to social rights.

      The Parliamentary Assembly regularly highlights social rights violations through its reports. Co-operation between the Council of Europe and the European Union needs to be promoted to strengthen the principles of indivisibility and universality of social rights and to preserve the cohesion of social rights protection systems. The Turin process aims to give a new dynamic to the treaty system to ensure that the European Social Charter is a lively instrument for upholding and promoting social rights. During the debates in Turin, we agreed that the most urgent social rights challenges include the fight against social exclusion and poverty, and protecting and supporting the most vulnerable population groups.

      The Turin process aims to stimulate further progress through parliamentary dialogue at various levels, and this report should be understood as a contribution to that process. The Amending Protocol to the European Social Charter provides for the election of European Committee of Social Rights members by the Parliamentary Assembly, along the lines followed for the election of judges of the European Court of Human Rights. However, the protocol has not yet entered into force, because ratifications by Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg and the United Kingdom are still pending. Only 15 member States have ratified the Additional Protocol to the European Social Charter Providing for a System of Collective Complaints. The revised European Social Charter, which introduces new rights and amendments adopted by the parties, such as the right to protection from poverty and social exclusion, the right to housing and the right to protection in the event of termination of employment, has been ratified by 34 member States. The objective of this process is to strengthen the European Social Charter as a normative system alongside the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

      With a view to gaining a full picture of the state of play and of the reception of the charter in different countries, I launched a limited survey, in the framework of this report, of the 13 countries that have not ratified the revised charter to identify their reasons for non-ratification and the remaining obstacles. Those countries’ main reasons for not ratifying the revised charter include: a perception that standards and monitoring obligations exceed or are inconsistent with national practice or capacity in certain areas; a perception that there are excessive margins of interpretation regarding some articles, such as those relating to non-discrimination; and a general disagreement with certain decisions by and procedures related to the European Committee of Social Rights.

      I have tried to open up a dialogue with national delegations about the remaining obstacles in the way of full accession to and implementation of the revised European Social Charter using a short survey and by holding bilateral meetings with individual delegations at the January part-session. To explore the Spanish situation, I met the main representatives of the various political parties, including opposition parties, in the Spanish Parliament. However, arranging such bilateral exchanges should be only a first step. It is probably not through political dialogue that the current incoherence of European legal systems and interpretations between the Council of Europe and the European Union will be overcome, but we need a political dialogue to address this issue and to underline the urgency with which we need to ensure better co-ordination between these legal systems in guaranteeing social rights.

      At the parliamentary level, contacts between the Parliamentary Assembly and the European Parliament could clearly be strengthened. For the present report, for example, I tried to set up an exchange of views between a member of the European Parliament and the committee to understand the European Parliament’s reaction to the European pillar of social rights, but such a meeting was extremely difficult to organise because of diary problems and differing priorities. However, I managed to have a short meeting with Maria Rodrigues MEP, rapporteur of the recently adopted report on the European pillar of social rights. We agreed that, while waiting for the pillar to be endorsed by all European Union member States and for the implementation phase to start, some actions could be initiated in parallel: first, more closely examining the potential of the European Social Charter to become a common benchmark and identifying possible gaps in the European Union pillar; and, secondly, exploring future opportunities for closer co-operation with a view to institutionalising a more regular dialogue between the European Parliament and the Parliamentary Assembly through various bodies.

      As regards the need to strengthen the European Social Charter as a normative system, we need to continue to promote social rights through dedicated events organised in co-operation with other Council of Europe bodies, and we must again invite the four countries that have not yet ratified the protocol amending the European Social Charter or the revised European Social Charter to do so to allow for the election of members of the European Committee of Social Rights by the Assembly. In the absence of such ratifications, we must once again call on the Committee of Ministers to adopt a unanimous decision in this respect, thus allowing the Assembly to fulfil its appointed function in the charter's monitoring machinery.

      In relation to promoting the dialogue on social rights and the co-ordination of political action with other European institutions, notably the European Union, we have to launch a true parliamentary dialogue on social rights that is based on current activities in this field. We should organise a high-level conference involving representatives of the Council of Europe, the European Union, national governments and parliaments, social partners and civil society organisations. We must ensure the regular participation of a representative of the Parliamentary Assembly in future meetings of the Conference of Parliamentary Committees for Union Affairs of Parliaments of the European Union, which is organised twice a year under changing European Union presidencies.

      We must also organise regular exchanges between committees of the Parliamentary Assembly and the European Parliament and its respective thematic rapporteurs on future issues of common concern. We should contribute to upcoming European Union events promoting social rights, such as the social summit for fair jobs and growth, which will be co-organised by the European Commission and the Swedish Government in Gothenburg on 17 November to debate the European pillar of social rights. I therefore invite everyone participating in this debate to keep in mind the new vision, new obligations and new opportunities offered by this report, which are meant to guide political actions in all our nations.

      I thank the secretariat for its commitment on this report. I particularly thank Maren Lambrecht-Feigl for her collaborative approach and very hard work, which has led to a very good report. She is very committed to it: she understood my idea and followed it closely throughout. This is our report, because she has contributed much to it.

      The PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Ms Bonet. I call Mr Xuclà to present the opinion of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy.

      Mr XUCLÀ (Spain)* – I want to share a few thoughts with the Assembly. Ms Bonet has explained that we need to update the welfare state, which is essentially the most important element of consensus in Europe. From the day that the socialists accepted the free market and the liberals and conservatives accepted that the welfare state provided cohesion in our societies, the welfare state became our most highly prized possession.

      Social policies enable us to promote equality of opportunity, and the Turin process for the revised European Social Charter, together with Ms Bonet’s report, provides a vision to ensure that they are preserved. Why do we need such a process? Because, as she rightly said, the economic crisis has had an impact on the ability of States to provide services and the demographic crisis throughout Europe has forced us to reconsider exactly how and when States provide services and maintain minimum wages, which vary greatly from one State to another. Above all, there has been a change in our societies: in the past, equal opportunities meant that a person’s career was more or less linear – he or she could train to do their work and then stay in the same job until they retired – but careers are now completely different. Someone who has a good job may, at the age of 35, 40 or 50, find themselves obliged to change their profession completely.

      The State must provide education for young people and enable them to go to university, and it must also give them access to social and medical services and treatments, but the welfare state must do much more if we are to meet this challenge. That was the thinking in the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy when we tabled the two amendments to the report. Ms Bonet has been to various countries and has gone to some lengths in the report to analyse the situation in countries that have not adopted the revised European Social Charter. Members would be wise to read the report to see which countries are involved, because we should speak out clearly in this Assembly – we must speak out loudly about social rights – and I should mention that Spain is one of those countries.

      This is Ms Bonet’s final presentation to the Parliamentary Assembly. Our political lives may be very long, but we also need to find time to enjoy our lives outside politics. Ms Bonet, after this June part-session, you will no longer be part of this Assembly. I express our huge thanks to you for your efforts, your constructive spirit, your openness to all of us in the Chamber and the hard work that you have carried out in the area of social affairs.

      Ms Bonet, the Council of Europe is a school for us to learn the best and the worst, because we hear great intentions set out here and sometimes extreme positions. We have got to know you through the Council of Europe, but life continues – there is much life ahead – and I will just say how much we appreciate all that you have done in working on these new instruments. I wish you all the best personally and all the best in your political life, because that is also likely to last for a long time. So, all the best to you and your family. Thank you very much.

      The PRESIDENT* – Thank you very much indeed, Mr Xuclà. We will now start the general debate. Let me now give the floor to Mr Nicoletti from Italy, on behalf of the Socialist Group.

      Mr NICOLETTI (Italy, Spokesperson for the Socialist Group)* – On behalf of the Socialist Group, I thank Sílvia for her excellent report and for all that she has done for the good of our group in this Assembly during her years of commitment. She is one of the most active, sensitive and passionate members of this Assembly in defence of human rights. We have greatly valued her presence here and we very much hope that she can continue to show her heartfelt commitment to such issues once she has left this Assembly.

      As the general rapporteur of the Turin process, I greatly appreciate this report. The process has brought us back to considering the way that things have developed. It has brought us back to the centre of our attention and caused us to think about such things both in this Assembly and in the Secretariat, as well as attracting the attention of the European Union to the social pillar. That, too, is a major contribution by our Organisation.

      One of the fundamental elements in this area that is constantly repeated is the unity and indivisibility of human rights. That is how they appeared in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and that was repeated in Vienna in 1993. These are fundamental rights of the individual and it is not possible to separate what exists in the civil, political and other spheres from material existence. To be free, we must have enough to eat, and we must be able to sleep and have a roof over our heads. We also need to remember the tragic destiny of so many individuals, above all some of the youngest people in our societies, who cannot fully enjoy all those things. That is why we need social rights.

      I thank Mr Xuclà and his committee for tabling amendments that show the unitary and indivisible nature of human rights. Today in our society, we are paying the price for our negligence during the time of untrammelled liberalism. We see poverty, old and new forms of slavery, and greater and greater inequalities. We see the negative consequences of these things, not only for young people but for the stability of democracies, because democracies depend on equality and on the strengths of their populations.

      Hence this report is very important and has our full support. We need to bolster the European Social Charter through ratification by States that have not yet done so and through the ratification of the collective complaints mechanism, which is a very important tool. In Italy, we think it is a useful tool to attract attention to social rights. We need to bolster the role of the Assembly. As has been said, we also need international co-operation. In that regard, our Assembly can play an important role, not only by organising relations with the European Union and other organisations but through relations with national parliaments on specific rights. I hope that there will be unanimous support for this report.

      Mr van de VEN (Netherlands, Spokesperson for the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Group) – The members of ALDE have taken notice of and interest in the draft report of Ms Bonet. She proposes, first, strengthening the European Social Charter as a common benchmark; secondly, strengthening the pan-European dialogue on social rights; and thirdly, improving compliance with the highest social rights standards at national level. ALDE supports these high-level proposals for increased social coherence in Council of Europe member States, with one exception, as I will explain.

      The report makes those positive and constructive proposals for more social coherence in Council of Europe member States conditional upon more income equality. The need for that condition is not supported or evidenced by arguments that can be sustained. ALDE is of the opinion that no direct causal link can be established between, on the one hand, the present proposals for more social coherence and, on the other hand, the levelling of income with additional tax burdens. ALDE feels that the financing of the proposals is swampy.

      In a democratic State, citizens should pay taxes on their income to provide the State with sufficient funds to finance the policy objectives of the government. Today, citizens typically hold a current account in their State of residence. They pay their taxes in return for State benefits, such as free access to schooling, health care, security, and justice. If you are privileged, in that you earn an income in excess of the average income, you pay more taxes, while the benefits you receive from the State are often less than those received by others, both in absolute and relative terms. On the other hand, if a citizen cannot take care of themselves, they should be supported by the State. This is solidarity under the social contract. Having said that, ALDE believes that the first objective of the democratic State is not to redistribute income from citizens with higher income levels to citizens with lower income levels, purportedly to create increased social coherence. ALDE denounces vexation in taxation.

      To strive for a so-called “level income field” would be a disaster for the development of the individual and for the welfare of the State. In the view of ALDE, therefore, the rather pallid proposal in the report for more income equality does not contribute in a recognisable, fair and reasonable way to increase social coherence.

      Mr OVERBEEK (Netherlands, Spokesperson for the Group of the Unified European Left) – I thank the rapporteur for a timely report and for her contribution. My group fully supports the recommendations, which call for the completion of the ratification of the European Social Charter by all member States of the Council of Europe. That will enable this Assembly to fulfil its functions under the charter, and strengthen co-operation with the European Union by aligning the charter and the European social rights pillar that it is developing.

      Why is that important? First, the European Conservatives Group and the Group of the European People’s Party have not even taken the trouble of appointing speakers for the debate. As Mr van de Ven made clear, this is an important issue because social rights are under pressure. In many of our member States, the effort to establish and strengthen social rights is still in an early phase. In many others, established rights, sometimes decades old, are under pressure. We have seen a sustained neo-liberal offensive to roll back the social welfare state.

      As Ms Bonet’s report shows, and as earlier reports adopted in this Assembly have shown in great detail – the most recent report was presented by our colleague Andrej Hunko – social inequality is on the rise in practically all our member States. Nine years after the outbreak of the global economic crisis, nearly a quarter of our population is still at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Inequality in income and in wealth is on the rise. The incomes of the bottom 90% of the population have remained static in real terms for many years. All the gains from increasing GDP have accrued only to people on the top 10% of the income scale. The lion’s share of that increase has gone to the top 0.1%.

      The liberalisation of the labour market has produced increasing numbers of working poor, especially through the rise of the so-called gig economy. The alternative sharing economy of couch surfing and car sharing has been turned into multi-billion dollar businesses such as Airbnb and Uber. Millions of people work in very precarious conditions. They work long hours for extremely low wages and have no vacation time or security. They often struggle with debt, which keeps increasing because of the accumulation of fines and penalties.

      Our tax systems are being restructured in such a way that they reproduce and deepen existing inequality. Tax increasingly shifts to mobile sources and away from fixed sources, and from direct to indirect taxation. We go from progressive to flat rates, and from capital to labour. The result is that the tax burden is shifting from the rich to the poor and middle classes. Combined with the effects of other policies such as the quantitative easing polices of the European Central Bank, we see a massive transfer of wealth and income to the infamous 1%.

      Against that background, Ms Bonet’s report offers a welcome and timely reminder that civil and political rights must be complemented by social rights to be sustainable in the longer run. The Group of the Unified European Left firmly supports the recommendations. All Council of Europe member States must complete the ratification and implementation of the revised European Social Charter. The Turin protocol must be ratified by all member States to allow for the election of ECSR members by this Assembly. Closer co-operation with the European Union is necessary to ensure that synergies between the European Social Charter and the social rights pillar are optimised.

      The deterioration of social conditions in so many of our member States requires action, especially since the economic crisis of 2008. The European Social Charter, which is the most comprehensive social rights standard in Europe, offers the framework for effective action. The group supports the appeal in the report to our member State governments to ensure that the millions of people trapped in poverty, debt, unemployment and bad health have the prospect of a better future.

      Mr MADEJ (Slovak Republic) – I congratulate the rapporteurs on this excellent and extremely important report.

      Social rights are the basis for the existence of a just and fair society. Social rights mean fair and just relations between the individual and society. The United Nations document “Social Justice in an Open World” states: “Social justice may be broadly understood as the fair and compassionate distribution of the fruits of economic growth”.

      The European Social Charter was established to support the European Convention on Human Rights and to broaden the scope of protected fundamental rights to include social and economic rights. I can state with great honour that the Slovak Republic adopted the revised charter in 2009. There were many disputes about the ratification of the documents. In the Slovak Parliament, some politicians said that it would be bad for the economy, the free market and growth, but we did not listen to them because we believe that economic growth must go in line with the strengthening of social rights. We were right. People feel more comfortable in a society in which they feel that they have better social justice.

      We support processes that help to extend social standards and rights in all European countries, not only in European Union member States. It is sad that some countries have not adopted the revised European Social Charter and related documents. We must support them and persuade them to do so.

      I fully agree with the rapporteur’s dissatisfaction with social inequalities. We risk growing populism and extremism in politics. We are responsible for our societies and we must move standards forward. The best way to fulfil our obligation to the people is to strengthen social rights and reduce social inequalities. Therefore, I wish parliamentarians all the best in reaching that goal in their countries.

      Mr GRIN (Switzerland)* – I congratulate and thank Ms Bonet for her excellent report on social rights in Europe. I would call them social and economic rights because, to provide social services, we need an economy to finance them. The best way to strengthen social and economic rights in all countries is to promote the European Social Charter. Three aspects are important in completing that process: the right to training and education, the right to work and the right to social welfare. However, we must not forget that duties are attached.

      All young people must have access to basic, advanced and professional education. That will enable them properly to integrate into the world of work and the economy. The right to work is fundamental. Good career advice fosters freedom of choice, but we also need practical and theoretical training. Safety at work should also be guaranteed. Businesses should establish safety procedures that protect workers from accidents and noxious substances.

      Youth unemployment is a big problem in our society. If a young person spends several years without finding a job, they will become discouraged and experience marginalisation, which can lead to delinquency or radicalisation. Harmonious workplaces increase GDP, so we need collective bargaining between employers and workers – that is better than conflicts and strikes. Establishing effective arrangements for getting people back into work means that those who have been through adversity can return to a job that is appropriate to their new situation.

To top it all off, there is the right to social welfare, a system that is well co-ordinated and covers the whole range of sickness, accident, invalidity and unemployment, as well as catering for the individual’s later years, with pensions based on social solidarity. Providing for old age is a sensitive subject but it affects us all. We are talking about people having a standard of living in retirement that enables them to age with dignity.

Our draft resolution is very relevant in respect of all those points and social standards, but the economic aspect is missing. It is covered in the European Social Charter but it would be worth mentioning it in our resolution as well. Amendment 1 puts the situation right, by stressing that a healthy democracy is inextricably linked with economic, education and social policy. It is exactly in tune with what I have been saying. Governments of all countries have to regain credibility through supporting not only social but economic rights, because they are human rights. We need to do that rather than establishing mere social welfare goals. If we want to give a new impetus to democracy in all our countries, we must start by reducing social inequality, which engenders distrust of policies, leads to a two-speed society and marginalises one section of the population.

The PRESIDENT* – That concludes the list of speakers. We still have some time. Does any member of the Assembly who was not on the list wish to take the floor? I call Ms Ohlsson.

Ms OHLSSON (Sweden) – I thank Sílvia Bonet for her excellent report. I look forward to welcoming you to Gothenburg, Sweden, in November. I also thank Jordi Xuclà for his opinion. Reinforcing social rights in Europe is so important and necessary. To reach sustainable development, you must include social aspects and rights, together with the economic and environmental perspective. Sometimes politicians forget to, or will not, include socio-economic rights because of the ideology they represent.

On social inclusion, we need to consider equality, gender equality, the child’s perspective and human rights in all matters. During this part-session, we have discussed migration, integration and gender equality and we are now discussing social rights, because without them you cannot achieve real inclusion and equality. Concrete issues are the right to health care for everyone, equal pay for the same job, the possibility of having a job with good and fair conditions, and the right to work full time, and to have a job you must have the possibility of child care, elderly care, parental leave and so on. This is a very important report about social inclusion and welfare.

Mr SCHENNACH (Austria)* – There is such a thing as feeling immediate warmth – a common bond – and that is what I felt when I got to know Sílvia. Thank you so much, Sílvia, for all you have done, in particular in the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development but also in the political group.

I asked for the floor because I felt compelled to speak after hearing from the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe. In the Monitoring Committee, we must periodically look at how things are going. Mr van de Ven said that you cannot achieve equality through taxes; well then, how can you achieve it? The most important things, from among the measures at our disposal, is to have reasonably decent minimum wages, equal pay for women and men doing the same job, no tax competition in Europe and a merciless fight against tax havens and loopholes. The latter are not minor gentlemen’s misdemeanours: the Panama papers were poison for our society’s cohesion and social justice.

We must oblige internationally active companies to bear their fair responsibility and ensure that people can actually live on their incomes. In recent years, there has been an increasing phenomenon of people not being able to live on what they earn, so we need to tackle all forms of precarious employment, which has become more and more pervasive over the past 10 to 15 years. The problem will reappear in 40 years’ time, when we find there is too little in the kitty to pay out pensions, because the contributions were too low. In my country, 50% of those who are employed pay no taxes because they earn too little to be liable for it. That is the reality. During the economic crisis, low wage earners often suffered from various forms of poverty while the top 5% earned many times more than them. That is why we need tax justice.

It is very important that everyone pays their taxes; that is the kind of consensus on which our societies should be based. It cannot be that some people pay no taxes; issues such as the Panama papers should always be followed up and tackled head on. We must ensure that we always stand by the weaker in society, because not everyone is in an equal position in terms of opportunity or education. We need solidarity in our societies, and not only taxes but comprehensive taxes – we can achieve regulation through taxes. That is one of the most important instruments that exists, as is apparent in the report. I congratulate Ms Bonet on her work.

Ms PALLARÉS (Andorra)* – I would like to talk about two issues. First, the report reminds member States that they need to comply with the European Social Charter. Regarding some of the criteria in the report, as a liberal, I have had debates with my colleague in Andorra, and I am among those who think that the best social support is to reactivate economies so that everyone has employment or can set up their own company. Some countries offer lower tax rates to encourage companies to relocate. We need greater uniformity of taxation throughout Europe to ensure that companies pay their fair share of tax but do not face excessive burdens in countries. Such an approach may also help to increase employment.

      On behalf of my delegation, I thank our colleague Ms Bonet. She has devoted many hours to preparing this report, and she has worked consistently on it. She has worked hard in our national parliament to secure change, and our national government has promised to do some of what she has asked. We may not agree on everything, but it is important that we fulfil our commitments in the Assembly. I thank my colleague for all the work that she has done. I have not been here as long as she has, but I have learned a lot from her about how the Assembly works. She will be sorely missed.

      (Mr Rouquet, Vice-President of the Assembly, took the Chair in place of Ms Gambaro.)

      The PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Ms Pallarés. I call the rapporteur, Ms Bonet, to reply.

      Ms BONET (Andorra)* – I have always thought that our Assembly should give more weight to social matters, and the report was strongly informed by that concern. It would have been better to have had this debate at a time when there were many more people in the Chamber. We could have had a richer and more productive debate, in which members from different political backgrounds expressed opposing viewpoints. As my colleague, Ms Pallarés, has just said, the report emphasises national parliaments’ role in defending Council of Europe principles – the enjoyment of social rights is among the most important of those principles – and ensuring that agreements such as the European Social Charter are applied, ratified and respected.

      We also need to strengthen the Assembly’s relations with other organisations. In our meetings, delegates from various countries said that some European Union measures ran counter to the principles set out in the European Social Charter. That is a problem for countries that are members of both organisations, and we need to work on it. That is why the report calls for the strengthening of relations between the two organisations. The voice of the Council of Europe must be heard within the European Union, and most of the proposals are along those lines.

      Let me respond briefly to what we have heard about pay equality. When wages go down, social security contributions fall and pension systems become less sustainable. There is less money to pay for institutions, and that causes problems. It is a vicious circle. I have always said that we need to improve wages and working conditions for all and tackle the wage gap between women and men. The welfare state must be protected. We discuss the welfare state a great deal here; social justice is achievable only if we support the welfare state, and we need to work out how best to do that.

      Finally, I would be delighted to go to the November meeting that Ms Ohlsson mentioned if I can. I thank other colleagues and ask them to continue to defend access to social rights, an important issue that is very close to my heart.

      The PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Ms Bonet. Does the vice-chairperson of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development, Mr Kürkçü, wish to speak? You have two minutes.

      Mr KÜRKÇÜ (Turkey) – The report was unanimously adopted in the committee, and I invite all Assembly members to vote in favour of it. The draft resolution and recommendation support the Turin process, which was launched by the Council of Europe in October 2014 at an intergovernmental conference held in Turin. The report calls on the Assembly to stick to the process proposed by the Council of Europe. I invite members to support the initiative and vote in favour of the draft resolution, which encourages all member States better to protect and promote social rights – they are fundamental human rights – and I encourage members to vote in favour of the draft recommendation, which invites the Committee of Ministers to require the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development to take specific measures to extend the competence of our Assembly.

      The PRESIDENT* – The debate is closed.

      The Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development has presented a draft resolution, to which two amendments have been tabled.

      The committee has also presented a draft recommendation, to which no amendments have been tabled.

      I understand that the chairperson of the committee wishes to propose to the Assembly that Amendment 2 to the resolution, which was unanimously approved by the committee, should be declared as agreed by the Assembly. That is the case.

      I call Mr Xuclà to support Amendment 1.

      Mr XUCLÀ (Spain)* – For a democracy to be healthy, it must be closely linked to economic, social and educational policies. Only on that basis can we have equality of opportunity. We can discuss this from an ideological point of view: must equality of opportunity always involve subsidies, or does it just mean giving people a second chance? We think that the amendment will prevent populism. In the committee, we debated what populism means. The amendment was not adopted unanimously, because some members believed that not all so-called populist parties were, in fact, populist. We would like the report to take into account the essence of the amendment. We are legislators, and we need to design social, economic and other policies that secure equal opportunity.

      The PRESIDENT* – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? That is not the case.

      What is the opinion of the committee?

      Mr KÜRKÇÜ (Turkey) – The committee is in favour.

      The PRESIDENT* – The vote is open.

      We will now proceed to vote on the whole of the draft resolution contained in Document 14343, as amended. A simple majority is required.

      The vote is open.

      We will now proceed to vote on the draft recommendation contained in Document 14343. A two-thirds majority is required.

      The vote is open.

2. Free debate (continued)

      The PRESIDENT* – We will now continue the free debate.

      I remind members that this debate is for topics not already on the agenda agreed on Monday.

      Ms Zohrabyan is not present, so I call Mr Rafael Huseynov. You have four minutes. Please start by identifying the topic you wish to raise.

      Mr Rafael HUSEYNOV (Azerbaijan) – My speech is on drug cultivation.

      An unpleasant incident that has become traditional has occurred this summer as well. This extremely serious occurrence, which absolutely has much wider than merely local significance, requires a serious reaction by international organisations and the world community. The matter in question is large-scale drug cultivation and its circulation beyond international control, which generates danger for all of us.

      The incident I am going to speak about has happened every summer in the past 25 years: with the direct participation of the Armenian army, fires are set in some of our seven Azerbaijani districts situated beyond the Nagorno-Karabakh region occupied by Armenia and the forces supporting it. Outwardly, it may seem surprising that the Armenian army does this work systematically every summer in depopulated empty lowland areas; for instance, two or three weeks ago, official information on the fires perpetrated by the Armenian army in the occupied district of Aghdam was spread in the media. What is the reason for this action taken regularly every summer by the Armenian army – that is to say, by the Armenian State? If it does not directly damage the opposite side and cause losses, it cannot be assessed as a military success. The reason is simple and its grave consequences are threatening not only two conflicting Council of Europe member States and the South Caucasus, but also the world.

      Armenia benefits from these occupied Azerbaijani territories basically for two purposes. Terrorist training camps are established. They have been outside international control for many years and now Armenians are cultivating drugs in the lands where Azerbaijanis once used to grow grain and other agricultural produce. Every summer, after collecting the harvest, those drug plantations are burned in order to hide their traces. The dirty money acquired from the drugs is spent by the Armenian State to support terrorism and buy arms. How otherwise can a country in deep economic crisis and with so much poverty earn the millions that it spends on arms?

      The data on drug cultivation by Armenia in the occupied Azerbaijani territories are deplorable facts identified by US special secret services during aerospace observation and filming and reflected in official reports. More regrettable is that everybody in the world condemns drug cultivation and its trade and transfer, but demonstrates indifference to taking any concrete steps or to raising the alarm about the existence of such obvious proof of the large-scale horrors perpetrated by Armenia. Maybe the international community views the terrorism performed by Armenia as a humanist act and drug trafficking as an acceptable form of civic trade.

      The Armenian army today continues to set fires in the occupied territories where the harvest has been newly collected. The resolute fight against the terrible truth behind those flames is a direct duty of all, including the Council of Europe.

      The PRESIDENT – Mr Kürkçü, Ms Chugoshvili, Mr Sabella and Ms Damyanova are not here. We are not doing very well with this list. I call Ms Pashayeva.

      Ms PASHAYEVA (Azerbaijan) – I want to talk about the detainees Dilgam Askerov and his friends. I thank Secretary General Jagland for his efforts to free them, but unfortunately we have not seen any signs that they have been freed. Armenia still keeps them, and we know they are being ill-treated and tortured, and are in bad health. Their only crime is to have been born in their own lands. They wanted to visit the graveyard of their parents and see the place for themselves. I urge the Council of Europe to increase its efforts to free them. As a representative of Azerbaijan, I call on you to put an end to this inhumane and illegal treatment, and I call again for pressure to be put on Armenia to free those detainees.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has called, under Resolution 1416 (2005), for Armenia to withdraw from the Azeri lands but Armenia’s neglect of that decision has created further tension in the region. I hope that the Parliamentary Assembly will impose sanctions on Armenia so that it takes action to fulfil the resolution. Why is it not being implemented? If the decision is neglected or considered null and void by Armenia, sanctions must be imposed. Armenia has been occupying these lands for 25 years. Why do we not discuss the rights of Azerbaijanis? I call on the Parliamentary Assembly to follow up on decisions that were previously taken so that Armenia fulfils its responsibilities.

Europe, Asia and Africa are going through a very difficult period; the conflicts and wars taking place should lead us to think seriously about various issues. Privilege and priority should be given to the dialogue between different religions and civilisations. Azerbaijan has always attached a great deal of importance to tolerance and a lot of international conferences and symposia underline that. We have no alternative to tolerance – we must not let racism take root. Islamophobia and anti-Semitism in Europe are another source of concern and should always remain on our agenda. We must get rid of these serious problems by working together.

The PRESIDENT* – Mr Rustamyan, Mr Csenger-Zalán, Ms Katsarava and Mr Kandelaki are not here. I call Ms Yaşar from Turkey.

Ms YAŞAR (Turkey)* – Instances of racism, intolerance, anti-Islamism and xenophobia all threaten the Council of Europe, and we are witnessing the spread of those diseases. We need to take immediate measures in Europe but unfortunately we do not make enough effort to get rid of those problems. There are those in certain circles who look upon these tendencies with sympathy, paving the way for such tendencies to take deeper root.

There are Muslim communities in many European countries, especially Turkish and Arab Muslim communities, and they have been the main target of discrimination, xenophobia and Islamophobia. There were 39 attacks on mosques in Europe in 2009 but by 2015 the number had increased to 60. The number of aggressive xenophobic attacks increased from 75 in 2014 to 128 in 2016. There has also been an increasing amount of aggression in refugee centres.

Hatred against Muslims leads to loss of property and loss of life. The number of attacks in places of worship is increasing, including on those who wear veils. Discrimination can be witnessed in daily life. Muslim families have a difficult time trying to find a place to rent, and many are not even considered when they apply for jobs. People who flee conflict areas are faced with Islamophobic reactions in Europe, and these conflicts are worsening.

Hate crimes against Muslims are increasing in Europe, and they harm the multicultural values of the Council of Europe. Responsibility for protecting these communities against aggression falls on the shoulders of members of the Council of Europe. Xenophobia and discrimination are serious threats, and we must underline that repeatedly. People must not fear aggression because of who they are, where they were born or the religion they belong to. Racism, Islamophobia and xenophobia must be fought within the framework of international co-operation. To prevent these threats, we must assume our responsibilities as members of the Council of Europe. Aside from the mechanisms in the Council of Europe, we must have more effective co-operation and take the necessary steps to increase those measures.

Mr KOÇ (Turkey)* – Following the arrest 10 or so parliamentarians from the HDP, a deputy from the main opposition party, the CHP, former journalist Mr Enis Berberoğlu, has been charged with spying and sentenced to 25 years’ imprisonment. He was found guilty of providing confidential information to a daily newspaper. He is accused of providing a video to the newspaper which confirms an interception in January 2014 of trucks belonging to the Turkish secret service transporting weapons to Syria. This caused a scandal at the time; President Erdoğan was furious and promised that the chief editor of the newspaper would suffer the consequences. The journalist, exiled in Germany, was sentenced last year to five years’ imprisonment. Two teachers at the university have been removed from their position; they are on hunger strike and their health is getting worse by the day.

I would like to mention the protest and civil disobedience taking place in Turkey. The head of the opposition, the Republican People’s Party – the CHP – has confirmed that he will continue with the march for justice from Ankara to Istanbul to protest against the imprisonment of members of his party and other elected members as well as 150 journalists, and all the injustice that has been suffered as a result of the implementation of the state of emergency, despite threats from President Erdoğan. The CHP leader deplored the fact that there is no independent justice in Turkey. That is the main reason for the march for justice. The judiciary is neither neutral nor independent: its judgments are handed down based on the violation of power rather than the rule of law.

      On 14 June, the leader of the CHP, set out on a 450 km march from the capital, Ankara, to Istanbul. I took part for the first 10 days, walking roughly 20 km each day. Every day, people from non-governmental organisations and unions, along with representatives of officials who had been dismissed and CHP members, took part in the walk. Those in power have taken action against the head of the CHP and those taking part in the walk. Mr Erdoğan said that it was thanks to him that the protest could go ahead during the state of emergency, because he authorised it. Last Saturday, he said that the opposition leader’s actions did not undermine justice, but warned him not to be surprised if the judicial authorities summoned him the next day. It was another open threat, calling for the prosecutor to prohibit something that is allowed under universal laws. The opposition leader will not give in to threats and intimidation, even though he is being threatened by the courts. He said that he is walking for justice, not against it.

      I have reached the end of my speaking time, but I just want to pass on the very warmest greetings from the people taking part in the walk for justice in Turkey.

      The PRESIDENT* – Ms De Sutter, Ms Kasimati, Ms Hovhannisyan and Ms Alqawasmi are not here, so we have reached the end of the list of speakers. We still have some time, though, so would anyone else like to speak? I call Mr Gunnarsson.

      Mr GUNNARSSON (Sweden) – I want to take this opportunity to congratulate our colleagues in the Bundestag who have today passed a law on equal marriage. It is a great step forward for Europe and for equality on our continent, and I hope that more member States follow the example of our colleagues in Germany. Inequality on same-sex marriage and LGBTI rights prevails in many States. It is totally unacceptable that some Council of Europe member States even work actively against the rights of LGBTI people. We need more examples of LGBTI rights being enhanced, as in Germany, rather than the contrary.

3. Changes in the membership of committees

      The PRESIDENT* – The Bureau has proposed the following changes in the membership of the Monitoring Committee:

      Mr Jacques Legendre, a member of the European People's Party, in place of Mr Thierry Mariani.

      Ms Gisela Wurm, a member of the Socialist Group, in place of Ms Maij.

      Ms Azadeh Rojhan Gustafsson, a member of the Socialist Group, in place of Mr Yanaki Stoilov.

      Are these changes agreed to?

      They are agreed to.

4. Progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee (continued)

      The PRESIDENT* – Finally, we continue consideration of the progress report of the Bureau.

      The Bureau has proposed several references to committees. They are in the progress report, Document 14345 Addendum 2. Are there any objections to these references?

      There are no objections, so the references are approved.

      We now come to the other proposals set out in the progress report, Document 14345 Addendum 2. Are there any objections to the adoption of the proposals?

      There are no objections, so the proposals are approved.

5. Voting champions

      The PRESIDENT* – I am pleased to announce the names of our voting champions – those members who have taken part in almost all the votes during this part-session. They are: Ms Christoffersen, Ms Eberle-Strub, Mr Ghiletchi, Mr Gunnarsson, Mr Önal, Ms Pallarés, Mr Schennach and Mr Wenaweser. I congratulate them all. As is traditional, we have small gifts for the champions; I invite them to come to collect them.

6. Closure of the part-session

      The PRESIDENT* – We have now come to the end of our business. Before I close the part-session, I must tell you that our chief usher, Jean-Michel Meyer, will retire at the end of this part-session after five years of loyal service. Jean-Michel Meyer practises and teaches fencing, which, like all sports, demands discipline, respect for others and respect for rules. These are qualities that he has shown throughout the years he has served in our hemicycle. In addition, fencing also requires self-control and anticipation – qualities he has always shown in carrying out his duties. We are very grateful to him for having anticipated our needs with diligence and discretion. On behalf of us all, a big thank you to him, and also to his team, whom he has developed in line with these standards, for their work in supporting us during our Strasbourg part-sessions. We wish him good luck for his well-deserved retirement, which we hope will allow him more time to devote to his passions. On behalf of the Assembly, the Secretary General and all the delegates, I am delighted to give you a small token of our appreciation, Mr Meyer. It is my last part-session, too, so I feel quite emotional. Thank you very much indeed.

      I wish the very best for the team of ushers, the Secretariat and the all interpreters who have been with us throughout what has been quite a long and difficult week. I thank all the Vice-Presidents who have helped by presiding over sittings of the Assembly: Sir Roger Gale, Ms Adele Gambaro, Mr Antonio Gutiérrez, Mr Carles Jordana, Mr Georgii Logvynskyi, Ms Ana Catarina Mendes, Ms Marianne Mikko, Ms Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Mr René Rouquet – I am on the list myself! – and Ms Ingjerd Schou. I also thank everyone who is still here, all the committee rapporteurs, who have carried out sterling work, the staff and the interpreters, whom I just mentioned.

      The fourth part of the 2017 session will be held from 9 to 13 October 2017.

      Before I declare the third part of the 2017 session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe closed, I wish to thank everyone for all the work that has been carried out here in the interests of our countries and to defend democracy, human rights and the rule of law. I pay special tribute to the Secretary General for his outstanding work, not only during the part-sessions but between them, and particularly this week, which has been a difficult part-session.

      The sitting is closed.

      (The sitting was closed at 11.40 p.m.)

CONTENTS

1. The “Turin process”: reinforcing social rights in Europe

Presentation by Ms Bonet of report of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development, Document 14343

Presentation by Mr Xuclà of opinion of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy, Document 14370

Speakers: Mr Nicoletti (Italy), Mr van de Ven (Netherlands), Mr Overbeek (Netherlands), Mr Madej (Slovak Republic), Mr Grin (Switzerland), Ms Ohlsson (Sweden), Mr Schennach (Austria) and Ms Pallares (Andorra)

Replies: Ms Bonet (Andorra) and Mr Kürkçü (Turkey)

Amendments 2 and 1 adopted

Draft resolution in Document 14343, as amended, adopted

Draft recommendation in Document 14343, adopted

2. Free debate (continued)

Speakers: Mr Rafael Huseynov (Azerbaijan), Ms Pashayeva (Azerbaijan), Ms Yaşar (Turkey), Mr Koç (Turkey) and Mr Gunnarsson (Sweden)

3. Change in the membership of committees

4. Progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee (continued)

5. Voting champions

6. Closure of the part-session

Appendix / Annexe

Representatives or Substitutes who signed the register of attendance in accordance with Rule 12.2 of the Rules of Procedure.The names of members substituted follow (in brackets) the names of participating members.

Liste des représentants ou suppléants ayant signé le registre de présence, conformément à l'article 12.2 du Règlement.Le nom des personnes remplacées suit celui des Membres remplaçant, entre parenthèses.

ARIEV, Volodymyr [Mr]

BALÁŽ, Radovan [Mr] (PAŠKA, Jaroslav [M.])

BAYKAL, Deniz [Mr]

BERNACKI, Włodzimierz [Mr]

BRASSEUR, Anne [Mme]

BRUIJN-WEZEMAN, Reina de [Ms] (MULDER, Anne [Mr])

BRUYN, Piet De [Mr]

BÜCHEL, Roland Rino [Mr] (FIALA, Doris [Mme])

BUTKEVIČIUS, Algirdas [Mr]

CERİTOĞLU KURT, Lütfiye İlksen [Ms] (DİŞLİ, Şaban [Mr])

ČERNOCH, Marek [Mr] (MARKOVÁ, Soňa [Ms])

CHRISTOFFERSEN, Lise [Ms]

CILEVIČS, Boriss [Mr] (LĪBIŅA-EGNERE, Inese [Ms])

COWEN, Barry [Mr]

EBERLE-STRUB, Susanne [Ms]

FRIDEZ, Pierre-Alain [M.]

GAFAROVA, Sahiba [Ms]

GAMBARO, Adele [Ms]

GERMANN, Hannes [Mr] (MAURY PASQUIER, Liliane [Mme])

GHILETCHI, Valeriu [Mr]

GIRO, Francesco Maria [Mr]

GOGA, Pavol [M.] (MAROSZ, Ján [Mr])

GOLUB, Vladyslav [Mr] (BEREZA, Boryslav [Mr])

GRIN, Jean-Pierre [M.] (MÜLLER, Thomas [Mr])

GUNNARSSON, Jonas [Mr]

GUTIÉRREZ, Antonio [Mr]

HAJDUKOVIĆ, Domagoj [Mr]

HAMID, Hamid [Mr]

HEER, Alfred [Mr]

HUSEYNOV, Rafael [Mr]

JANSSON, Eva-Lena [Ms] (KARLSSON, Niklas [Mr])

JENIŠTA, Luděk [Mr]

KESİCİ, İlhan [Mr]

KLICH, Bogdan [Mr]

KOÇ, Haluk [M.]

KOX, Tiny [Mr]

KRESÁK, Peter [Mr]

KÜÇÜKCAN, Talip [Mr]

KÜRKÇÜ, Ertuğrul [Mr]

LEITE RAMOS, Luís [M.]

LOGVYNSKYI, Georgii [Mr]

MADEJ, Róbert [Mr]

MARAS, Gordan [Mr] (MESIĆ, Jasen [Mr])

MASIULIS, Kęstutis [Mr] (ŠAKALIENĖ, Dovilė [Ms])

MIKKO, Marianne [Ms]

NENUTIL, Miroslav [Mr]

NICOLETTI, Michele [Mr]

OHLSSON, Carina [Ms]

ÖNAL, Suat [Mr]

OVERBEEK, Henk [Mr] (MAEIJER, Vicky [Ms])

PALLARÉS, Judith [Ms]

PASHAYEVA, Ganira [Ms]

POLIAČIK, Martin [Mr] (KAŠČÁKOVÁ, Renáta [Ms])

ROUQUET, René [M.]

SCHENNACH, Stefan [Mr]

SCHNEIDER, André [M.] (ROCHEBLOINE, François [M.])

SCHNEIDER-SCHNEITER, Elisabeth [Mme] (LOMBARDI, Filippo [M.])

SEYIDOV, Samad [Mr]

SOBOLEV, Serhiy [Mr]

TOPCU, Zühal [Ms]

VÁHALOVÁ, Dana [Ms]

VAREIKIS, Egidijus [Mr]

VEN, Mart van de [Mr]

VITANOV, Petar [Mr] (JABLIANOV, Valeri [Mr])

VOVK, Viktor [Mr] (LIASHKO, Oleh [Mr])

WENAWESER, Christoph [Mr]

WIECHEL, Markus [Mr] (NISSINEN, Johan [Mr])

XUCLÀ, Jordi [Mr] (BILDARRATZ, Jokin [Mr])

YAŞAR, Serap [Mme]

YEMETS, Leonid [Mr]

ZELIENKOVÁ, Kristýna [Ms]

ZINGERIS, Emanuelis [Mr]

Also signed the register / Ont également signé le registre

Representatives or Substitutes not authorised to vote / Représentants ou suppléants non autorisés à voter

BONET, Sílvia Eloïsa [Ms]

HAMOUSOVÁ, Zdeňka [Ms]

RIBERAYGUA, Patrícia [Mme]

Observers / Observateurs

Partners for democracy / Partenaires pour la démocratie

LABLAK, Aicha [Mme]

Representatives of the Turkish Cypriot Community (In accordance to Resolution 1376 (2004) of

the Parliamentary Assembly)/ Représentants de la communauté chypriote turque

(Conformément à la Résolution 1376 (2004) de l’Assemblée parlementaire)

Mehmet ÇAĞLAR

Erdal ÖZCENK