Proposition 52K0721

Proposition de résolution relative aux enfants abandonnés dans des orphelinats et des établissements psychiatriques dans les pays de l'ancien bloc de l'Est (aujourd'hui membres de l'Union européenne).

General information ¶

Authors

CD&V Michel Doomst
Ecolo Juliette Boulet
Groen Stefaan Van Hecke
LE Brigitte Wiaux
LDD Ulla Werbrouck
MR Jean-Luc Crucke
Open Vld Herman De Croo, Hilde Vautmans
PS | SP Camille Dieu
Vooruit Bruno Tuybens

Submission date

Jan. 24, 2008

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

Bulgaria resolution of parliament psychiatric institution children's rights social facilities orphan

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld N-VA LDD MR FN VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

March 6, 2008 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

by Mr. Brotcorne is the rapporteur.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, the commission examined a proposal for a resolution on the situation of orphan children in Romania and extended its work to the former Eastern bloc.

At the first meeting of the committee, it was decided to wait for the return of a technical mission that had been sent to Bulgaria, following facts that had been brought to the attention of the members on the occasion of a television program denouncing the situation of abandoned Bulgarian children.

The Commission has heard the mission returning from Bulgaria. This strategic cell, which depended on the Ministry of Social Affairs and Public Health, ⁇ to our commission. This is how Ms. De Cock explained the context in which this mission took place.

In consultation with the Minister of Social Affairs and Public Health, the Minister of Foreign Affairs decided to send this technical mission to examine the problem of children’s homes in Bulgaria, in a global context clearly in line with a structural approach.

The object of the study was double: on the one hand, to see what could be done directly from a humanitarian point of view, on the other hand, what could be proposed on a more structural level, in the duration.

The mission visited six institutions, which presented significant differences in the quality of the care provided. Indeed, although the financing of the institutions is largely national, the institutions themselves fall within the competence of the local authorities and much depends on the will or lack of will of the local authorities. Where local authorities have invested in institutions, a real difference can be seen.

However, none of the institutions visited meet the Belgian standards. The situation in Mogilino's home, which was the subject of the British report broadcast on television, indicates that relations with local authorities are tense and explain, in part, the punching situation in which the children are.

The committee also identified major deficiencies in terms of therapies, in particular due to the lack of differentiation between pathologies, the lack of schooling of children, the poor material quality of buildings and infrastructures often outdated and which do not meet basic health standards.

Finally, the committee found that there was no individualized approach, with care and reception being collectively designed. Under these conditions, it is clear that very little space is given to the personal development of each of the children entrusted to these centres.

The Commission was obviously interested in how this situation could be improved, of course in consultation with the Bulgarian authorities.

This is how the experts of the technical mission recommended, on the one hand, an emergency measure and, on the other hand, structural instructions.

For the emergency measure, since, in each of the establishments visited, a certain number of children were ⁇ not in their place – for example, due to the lack of adequate equipment for their disability – it is proposed to insist on the Bulgarian authorities that these children be transferred to institutions better suited to their case.

As for the more structural recommendations, the expert group proposes that Belgium relay the case to the European level in such a way that sufficient resources can be dispatched, insisting on the fact that the situation is not specific to Bulgaria. In fact, it is estimated that in Europe, about 1.2 million children housed in institutions are in difficult conditions.

A second recommendation of the same type is a discussion initiated with UNICEF and the Bulgarian government to decentralize the adoption of children. Experts from the technical mission propose that Belgium bring its therapy know-how and staff to this initiative, which could be realised in a cooperation agreement. It also insists that the regional and community levels should be included in the sponsorship of Bulgarian institutions. Finally, on a more political level, the Belgian authorities must place the issue on the agenda of the various international councils.

This report of the technical mission was the subject of discussion within the committee; it considered it necessary to extend the considerations of the resolution beyond Bulgaria alone. Everyone participated in the submitted amendments in such a way as to take into account the work of the expert mission.

I think I can conclude my report by reminding that not only the amendments but also the entire resolution were adopted unanimously and that the committee made its own remarks by Mr. De Croo said that "in a more general way, it must be emphasized that the value of a civilization is measured by the care it gives to its weakest members."

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, colleagues, we have all seen them, the BBC report or pieces of that report, about the orphanage in Bulgaria. We all – I now look at colleague Tuybens – have heard the call from Chris Dusauchoit. Chris woke us up. Chris has warned Belgium that we must react.

I must tell you: we have reacted massively, both here in the House as well as in Flanders, in Wallonia, throughout the world. Many spontaneous relief actions have been launched.

I think those horrible images won’t let you go when you’ve looked. I am looking at Herman De Croo. Herman, you watched with us that afternoon. The pictures you’ve seen don’t really let you go. You think back to those children, even though a lot has happened in the meantime.

I think I can say that. We received the Bulgarian ambassador in our committee and there were many steps taken afterwards. There was a fact finding mission of six Belgian experts. The Belgian government has released 250,000 euros. The conscious orphanage has been closed, along with six other Bulgarian institutions. The Bulgarian Council of Ministers has also taken measures. There was a benefit in Bulgaria. An association will be established. And there is a national UNICEF action plan to accelerate reforms there.

In short, I think that BBC reporting has achieved a lot. I think if one child got better, it was all worth it.

But I also think, colleagues, that we should strive for more. With this resolution, we want to go beyond Bulgaria alone. I think Bulgaria has opened our eyes. It has shocked us, it has shaken us that still – colleague Brotcorne referred to this – 1.2 million children in Europe live in miserable conditions.

I know there are opportunities for improvement. Look at Romania. In the meantime, much has improved in Romania. Remember, a few years ago we also received such horrible images. In the meantime, reforms have taken place and the situation has improved.

With this resolution we do not want to stigmatize, we want to help. Collega Brotcorne has listed the measures that we call on the government to take in this resolution. With this resolution, we would like to draw attention to the situation in the orphanages in all Eastern European countries, even when there is no reporting.

The resolution was unanimously adopted by the committee. I hope you will do the same later. I thank you.

On 23 January, Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Speaker of the Committee on Foreign Affairs invited us urgently to a special meeting of the committee to discuss the issue of orphan and disabled children in Bulgaria. This report probably affected her enormously, which can be understood. She wanted the parliamentary committee to act to denounce this phenomenon and to allow us to act.

Bulgaria has one of the highest numbers of disabled children living in institutions in the European Union. This results from a long-standing state policy that encouraged abandonment and isolation of disabled children, who were then placed in social homes in small villages. One of these houses located in Mogilino is now known thanks to this report, following which pressure has been exercised to close these houses. However, there are still a large number of them.

These homes are usually located in small villages where children do not have access to rehabilitation centers. They do not have frequent contacts with their families or access to health care. It is therefore very difficult for them to reintegrate into society.

Beyond the stigmatisation of this specific home, we have seen other examples, including children who died as a result of this life in these homes. It was therefore necessary to denounce these facts because they are contrary to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

At this emergency meeting, I had intervened, on the one hand, to indicate that the phenomenon was not new since the European Parliament had already denounced it for several years and, on the other hand, that it was also necessary to realize that in Belgium people with disabilities sometimes lived in extremely precarious situations and were not in suitable centres.

Certainly, it was necessary to look at the situation in Bulgaria without forgetting that there are very difficult situations here. I know many of them personally.

The Ecolo-Groen group. We will join this resolution because the work done here is very satisfying and full of good intentions. The text, in its first paragraph, calls on the federal government to develop a programme jointly with the European Union because it is at the European level that it is most important to work on a concrete and in-depth programme that improves living conditions in a structural way, as stated in the resolution.

Therefore, we will support this resolution proposal. My colleague from the Greens group in the European Parliament has denounced this situation since 2000.

Mr. Speaker, some aspects have already been proposed by the colleagues and it is not my intention to repeat them. However, I would like to point out two small points.

The first point is that the title of the resolution was originally intended to address us to Bulgaria. In the meantime, in the course of the work, it has been transformed into "former Eastern bloc countries". Indeed, the reporter also mentioned it. UNICEF estimates that 1.2 million children live in these conditions in former Eastern European countries. It is therefore, I think, logical that Bulgaria is not mentioned by name.

However, the absence of reference in the title and text of the resolution does not mean that Bulgaria, like the other new EU Member States, does not have to comply with the human rights standards associated with the membership of the European Union. By becoming a member of the European Union, these countries declare their agreement to accept the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and other European human rights standards applicable to them. Bulgaria should not be exempt from those obligations.

In addition, a number of crimes may have occurred in those institutions. Of course, impunity cannot triumph in these. It’s not just about South Kivu where impunity needs to be countered.

A second, last point I would like to point out, is my fear that in the last decade the EU has proportionally focused much more on the economy of the future than on the well-being and importance of the people of today. Bulgaria is forced by the facts to introduce a flat tax of 10% without social taxation, without the European Union apparently imposing criteria and standards on its new candidate Member States in order to require the implementation and observance of fundamental human rights. In this regard, I think there is still a long way to go.

It has been referred to the quote of a colleague who said that the value of a society can be measured by the way the least well-being of that society are or are treated. Well, in that respect, the European Union must be in ⁇ poor health, because otherwise this would not happen.

Hence, I hope that in the next decades social policy will begin to take precedence, the happiness of the major over the large profits of the few.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, first of all, I would like to thank Mrs. Hilde Vautmans who was at the initiative of this proposal for a resolution and who made all the members of the committee and of this Assembly work.

I would like to intervene because this proposal for a resolution demonstrates our full commitment to the rights of the child but above all to recall the importance that the CDH attaches to the defence of the rights of the child in all its forms and, in this case, to the defence of children abandoned in orphanages and psychiatric establishments in the countries of the former Eastern Bloc which are now members of the European Union.

You mentioned it, Madame Vautmans. One could actually be shocked by the British journalist’s documentary about abandoned children in Bulgaria. It caused a great wave of indignation, as this documentary revealed the horrible living conditions, the lack of medical support and training that suffers from too many children and disabled people placed in institutions, orphanages, care facilities and hospitals in Eastern European countries. But it is not enough to be indignant; we have the moral duty to assist these countries so that they experience a radical and structural improvement in the living conditions of these children, in particular with regard to the reception, well-being and training of children, disabled or not, placed in these institutions and orphanages.

Many former Eastern bloc countries have recently joined the European Union. In recent years, they have made tremendous progress, but they must continue on the path of reforms and the introduction of European law. The principle of the rights of the child is not yet sufficiently established; our country and the European Union can help in this area. In this regard, projects that help these countries to improve the future of their children benefit from broad political support, as Ms. Vautmans said. I will pinpoint all the actions of UNICEF but also those of the World Bank.

By voting on this proposal, we call on the Government to make every effort to structurally improve the living conditions, guidance and education of children placed in the institutions and orphanages of these countries. That is the whole meaning of this resolution. I am not going to detail it, since Mr. Brotcorne, as the rapporteur, recalled all of these requests.

First of all, I would like to thank the rapporteur. Brotcorne, for the quality of its report. This report is actually consensual because it deals with a consensual topic even though, in the background, it is extremely difficult. In my introduction, allow me also to thank the President of the Commission, but also the one who is at the initiative of this resolution, Mrs Vautmans. Sometimes it’s easier to talk about these kinds of things by having a sort of fog screen in front of you. There are things that we don’t like to see. There are things that one does not want to know or hear and which – it seems – if one does not talk about them, they do good.

I think it is the opposite; it is not a question of good or evil, but a question of moral duty. Madame Vautmans, you have had the courage, the audacity and I will dare to say also the intelligence to submit this resolution to the vote of this Parliament. I have no doubt that a very large majority, not to say the unanimity of the banks, will react sensitively.

Nor can we, through a difficult subject like this, pinch a country: it was not the purpose of saying that, in one country more than in others, this dramatic situation on the human level is to be shown with the finger. But it exists, so we must be able to talk about it. Who are we to give a moral lesson? This is not the purpose. This was well understood and I appreciated the way things went. Apart from the hardness of the images, the shock of the images, I keep in mind the words of this ambassador of Bulgaria who, very simply, very humanly, himself being very shocked, came to recognize the facts. This is also the greatness of a diplomat, that of being able to tell us that what we have seen exists.

This commission has therefore had the intelligence to admit that it is not only there, that this situation is unfortunately more widespread than one thinks. And that it is because we are Europeans, that we have the possibilities in Europe to correct such a situation, to improve it, to advise that solidarity must play. That it can play in a deep sense, a sense of respect for the human being but above all a deep sense of the quality of care. They are those who have the least opportunity to speak, those who have the least opportunity to defend themselves who must be the most defended, the most cared for, the most framed.

I am happy to have been able to participate in these discussions. However, let us return to Caesar what belongs to Caesar: it is also not a moral obligation, but a duty for me. If this resolution can make the thoughts evolve, if it allows to leave less in anonymity those who need our word, whatever the political and philosophical thinking of those who sit on these banks, I think we will have done a useful job.

It is therefore with enormous confidence that within the MR we ask all of you to vote on this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, briefly this, in order to complete the unanimity from our group – I hope at least – around this position.

Sometimes it is important that files come bottom up. This question is really supported by the population, broken up as it is through a report. So it is very good that we have had that meeting in the committee. I cannot make Mrs. Vautmans bloom as beautiful as Mr. Crucke. Rightly indeed. Or maybe I can do it reasonably!

I would like to thank my colleagues for this co-initiative. Everything has already been said. Bulgaria is a European country, a reason more for us strongly warning signal and the call for consultation and cooperation. We have tried, as we have said earlier, to look at it wider than this one orphanage and wider than Bulgaria. Therefore, we propose to put this on the European agenda. We ask that the most acute needs be detected and that all efforts be made to try to remedy them. I hope that one will not wait for the next report on this subject and that agreements will be made faster to follow up on the situation, so that this will not become a forgetful but a reminder point.