Activities of Ulrike LUNACEK related to 2011/2007(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Progress on mine action (short presentation)
Amendments (26)
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
– having regard to the Action Plan adopted in November 2009 at the Second Review Conference of the 1997 Ottawa Convention, which took place in Cartagena, Colombia,
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
- having regard to the Oslo Convention on Cluster Munitions signed by 94 states on 3-4 December 2008 in Oslo, which entered into force on 1 August 2010,
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 b (new)
Citation 6 b (new)
- having regard to its Resolution on the Entry into force on 1 August 2010 of the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) and the role of the EU adopted on 8 July 2010,
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas ‘Mine Action’ includes survey, detection, marking and clearance of anti- personnel landmines (APL) and other explosive remnants of war (ERW) including cluster munitions remnants and improvised explosive devices (IEDs), mine risk education, victim assistance and stockpile destruction,
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the persistence of APL and IEDERW, including IED and cluster munitions remnants, in addition to inflicting loss of human life, especially among civilian populations, represents a serious obstacle to post- conflict reconstruction of afflicted countries, and may serve as a raw material for IED,
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas by 1 December 2010, 156 States had formally agreed to be bound by the Mine Ban Treatyacceded or ratified the Mine Ban Treaty and 2 EU Member States had signed but not ratified it,
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas only onetwo government – Myanmar and Libya – hasve recently laid APL, no exports or state transfers of APL were recorded, and only three states were thought to be continuing their manufacture,
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas most responsible armed forces long ago ceased using APL, but they have continued to be a weapon of choice, along with IED and cluster munitions, by insurgent and terrorist groups and other non-state actors,
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the need for victim assistance will continue long after the APL threat has been removed, whereas only 9% of global spending on Mine Action are at present assigned to victim assistance and 99% of EU funding is assigned to mine clearance which leaves very little to victim assistance,
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas the perception of a mine threat is often greater than the reality and it thast been calculated that only 2% of ltter survey methodologies and understanding of survey results can and that is physically cleared, often at considerable cost, is actually contaminated with APL or ERWve in recent years dramatically reduced the need for full clearance of suspected hazardous areas,
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Strongly welcomes the fact that 156 countries have now acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty including 265 EU member states but regrets that some 379 countries, including the EU Member States Finland and Poland have still not signed;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Strongly welcomes the fact that 56 countries have now joined the Convention on Cluster Munitions, including 15 EU member states but regrets that 139 countries, including 10 EU member states, have still not adhered;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the fact that a further seven countries announced completion of their clearance activities in 2009 and 2010, bringing the total number of states to do so to 16, but regrets the fact that 26 States Parties have needed to request an extension to their 10-year clearance deadline under the Mine Ban Treaty;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls on Libya, Myanmar, as well as those non-state armed groups using AP mines and cluster munitions, to halt use immediately;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Deplores the fact that of thedespite more than a decade of clearance by the world’s largest and most highly-funded humanitarian demining program, Afghanistan still has one of the highest casualty rates in the world, with 508 APL/ERW/IED casualties between 1 March 2009 and 1 March 2010, over half of which were children;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes the improvements in mine action management through establishment of the BiH Mine Action Centre, under a central Demining Commission in but regrets that BiH has fallen far behind the funding and clearance targets liaisod out in with an international Board of Donorss extension request under the Mine Ban Treaty;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recognises that resource mobilization poses major challenges for the government and that the Mine Action Strategy 2009– 2019 has yet to be adopted and; regrets that the government'’s principle body in charge of mine action, the Demining Commission has not met with donor representatives based in Sarajevo for some years nor have its members attended international meetings of the Mine Ban Treaty since the treaty’s Second Review Conference in 2009 and urges the government to take full ownership of mine action to ensure its strategic planning and management;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recognises that the lives and livelihoods of APL/ERW/IED, cluster munitions casualties are blightmarked for ever, that these innocent victimcasualties, particularly civilians often come from the poorest elementspeople in some of the poorest countries, and require highly specialistargeted and continuing medical and social support and assistance, and that this will be necessary even when there are no further landmine, cluster munitions, IED and EWR incidents causing casualties;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Regrets that landmine survivors or their representative organizations participated in the implementation of victim assistance in less than half of affected countries and endorses the need for such survivors views and rights to be fully respected; urges the international community and the European Union to significantly increase funding for victim assistance but not at the expense of mine clearance;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls for the European Commission to allocate further research funding to mine survey and detection technologies and techniques, in close cooperation with international partners and to use funds available in the context of Framework Program 7 and the Security Research cluster;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Is concerned by diversion of resources into ‘'mine clearance’' of areas where there is little humanitarian or economic development threat, or where there is perception of threat but no reality, to the detriment of focus on areas of high threat to life,insufficient basis for classifying land as mine-affected and calls for greater emphasis on improved planning and management of operations and more accurate initial survey and reporting of suspect areas;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Believes that the international community and the European Union should focus its attention on mine clearance and assistance to victims in those countries least able to help themselves, and on mine clearance and assistance to victims, and that the aim should be to move more rapidly to a situation where countries can be declared free of mine threat to life and economic development while ultimately moving towards the clearance of all known mined areas;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Regrets that there is no reliable measure of the current number of victims of APL/ERW/IED and urges a, cluster munitions and urges an assessment disaggregated by age and gender proper analysis as a guide to targeting resources more effectively, with greater consideration given to the medical and social needs of victims and their families;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Regrets that since the elimination of the EU'’s dedicated budget line in 2007, the EU has lacked an instrument that is flexible and multi-country in nature, responding coherently to mine action priorities and that there is a drop in the transparency of EU funding for mine action, in quantitative terms, a drop in overall EU funding for mine action from 68,4 million in 2006 to 33 million in 2007 and calls therefore for restoration of a more dedicated approach, with one budget line under one lead directorate with dedicated staff that will signal the strength of the EU'’s continued commitment to mine action which needs to take into account the specific needs of individual countries as laid down in Country Strategy Papers and at the same time the fact that in some countries the existence of landmines has become a structural issue and thus an issue for EU development policy;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38 a. calls for a qualitative in depth evaluation of EU funding on mine action during the past and the present multiannual financial perspective in order to shed light on specific advantages and shortcomings of the different approaches (dedicated budget line or mainstreaming into development policy or other external instruments) that have been used and also in order to provide a sound basis for the next multiannual financial perspective;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 b (new)
Paragraph 38 b (new)
38 b. regrets that so far neither the exceptional assistance (Article 3) nor the long term component (Article 4) of the Instrument for Stability have been used for funding of mine action programs;