Claude Moraes, rapporteur. − Mr President, on behalf of my group, I want to state first of all that the content of this report – the amended Visa Facilitation Agreement – offers real and tangible value to Ukrainian citizens by ensuring that procedures are introduced for travelling to the EU. There is no disagreement about what the report says. I think it offers particular benefits for representatives of Ukrainian civil society, NGOs, journalists and young people. I was happy to support this in terms of neighbourhood policy and to promote a report which I genuinely believe, in relation to all the other visa facilitation agreements with countries like Russia, Serbia, Albania and Moldova, makes a very positive contribution to neighbourhood policy.

None of those amended visa facilitation agreements between the EU and all of those other countries are to be subject to discussion or debate, only this one with Ukraine. I called for this debate for a particular reason, which is that we need to voice our concerns about recent legislative developments in the field of human rights which seriously infringe the rights of Ukrainian LGBT citizens.

Last autumn the Ukrainian Government passed a first-reading agreement, supported by both majority and opposition parties, on Bill 8711, condoning legislation to ban ‘homosexual propaganda’. If adopted, the bill would introduce criminal sanctions for the production or distribution of any information that would ‘promote’ homosexuality.

Such legislation is in contradiction with the fundamental rights and values that the European Union is built on. It signifies the opposite of all of our work in the fight against discrimination and homophobia and to uphold citizens’ fundamental rights. We in our group – and, I think, many across this House – believe that, as the European Union is a community of values, we should take note of this human rights issue in dealing with a visa facilitation agreement that raises serious human rights concerns.

In February I received the welcome news that the Ukrainian Government intended to adopt new anti-discrimination legislation that would include and specifically list sexual orientation. The Ukrainian Government has even sought advice from the European Commission on this legislation and received amendments on LGBT rights. Unfortunately, I have subsequently learned that there is a real risk that the Ukrainian Government may no longer include sexual orientation in the legislation. It is for this reason that we are having this debate tonight: to send a clear message that such restrictions on LGBT fundamental rights should not be accepted and that the European Union, when advancing towards visa liberalisation, should take note of this type of action.

With tonight’s debate, my group wants to send a clear message to both the Ukrainian Government and the Commission that there should be no deepening of the EU-Ukraine relationship as long as the legislation on ‘homosexual propaganda’ is still on the table in the Ukrainian Government and Parliament. We want to see advances towards progressive, serious improvements as regards LGBT rights, the rule of law and democracy in Ukraine before there is any move towards full liberalisation.

The EU is a community of values. There is some discussion as to whether visa liberalisation is the correct tool to advance human rights issues. In my view, the reason we are calling for this debate on issues which would normally simply see a cursory vote in this Parliament is because we care about these fundamental values. I think this view is shared by many Members across this House. Therefore, I think all these reports should have a human rights and fundamental rights component. I am very proud that this is something we should always build into our reports and whatever we do in this House.

We are a Community of values, after all, and for this reason I wanted this debate to focus on this issue.