3 Written explanations of Margrete AUKEN

. – 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’.

Two AMs 16 & 41 from EPP & ECR about Christians are to some extend factually true. Christians face discrimination and persecution and their freedom of religion is not protected. But the persecution and discrimination comes from Israel and Israeli settlers – because the Christians are Palestinians – and neither PA nor Hamas can protect them, because the occupation force is using disproportionate violence and power over both Palestinian people and authorities.It was difficult not to support the very reasonable AMs from the LEFT group, but I felt the need to respect the group line, the compromise text and the good work of the shadow rapporteur from my group and the rapporteur from S&D.

Jeg kunne ikke støtte en beslutning, der ikke forlangte et stop for myrderierne (våbenhvile), og stemte derfor blankt til den fælles beslutning. Jeg fulgte så vidt muligt min gruppe, selv om det var svært. Der var mange gode ændringsforslag fra The Left-gruppen som jeg gerne ville støtte. Men jeg valgte at følge det kompromis, gruppen havde indgået, og det indebar, at ingen støttede ændringsforslag fra andre grupper. Det var dog OK at stemme blankt, hvor det virkelig var svært at stemme imod. Derfor har jeg og enkelte andre i gruppen stemt blankt, hvor gruppens indstilling var at stemme imod. Det gjaldt om ikke at få vedtaget æf fra ECR og ID, og det lykkedes nogenlunde. Det var nok gavnligt, at vi fra Parlamentets side trods alt fik vedtaget en beslutning, der kunne støtte Borrells linje (overfor f.eks. UvdL), selv om Parlamentets beslutning i denne sag næppe kommer til at spille den helt store rolle.