r/Luxembourg • u/Mysterious_Ad9416 • 2d ago
Ask Luxembourg Blood donation restrictions
Hello there! I have written several days ago regarding the discussion on blood donation in Parliament. A very kind person here translated for me the discussion between the Health Minister and a Member of Parliament on the issue of blood donation restrictions for gay men.
However, there is one more part where the Minister is speaking about the issue before MPs voted against a motion. Can someone translate it for me, please? The link of discussion is https://www.chd.lu/fr/seance/3024 . Minister Deprez's speech starts on 1:12:35 before the end of the video, if you look at the bar down below and click on "Motion de Mme Paulette Lenert relative..." it should take you there. Thank you in advance!
4
u/orkman198 2d ago
Hey, i translated already the previous part. I am not a professional, so errors might happen. This one was difficult to translate. It also involves in some parts knowledge about the situation, like lenert having a burn out (because of covid) in her legislative period when she was health minister etc. So some parts you dont really understand everything if you dont know the entire context etc and i am not that deep into lux politics... I start the translation at the point where you asked for 1:12:35 before the end of the VOD, when deprez speaks. And i guess the short tranlastion from the other person, was already good enough to understand the main point but i post my translation anyway as i took the time and effort to do it.
DEPREZ: "Yeah thanks for all the input/remarks. I want to speak a momemt about what Madame Bernard said. Yeah i have launched in mid november the idea to change this blood donour center into an "établissement public". So we would have solved this problem and then we, the state, could take the entire responsibility. But because we give the croix rouge an agrément (agreement maybe in english?) to do this, because the croix rouge is doing this for us, we as state can't simply take the entire responsibility. We would create a précédent. And that's what got fiscussed in the meetings, that happened already under the previous governoment. We are optimistic and i go out reinforced by this discussion, that we can continue these discussions and that we can solve this issue positively in this legislative period like it is written in our coalition agreement. Thank you very much."
LENERT: "I am calmed (in the sense of optimistic,happy) about the great approval about the "compte au fond" ( so the basic motion/the essential point). The blame/criticism that this hasnt been finished already before, i can really accept it. I have to say that that i had no more patirnce at the end of the legislative period. If it was to redo, i would have taken the last week the réglement ministèrielle. Because i could have taken it solely. I was probably to nice. We accepted the deal that it gets linked. I never saw the link. We have to allways remember about what we talk about. We talk about an absurd rule, the risivo isnt higher.. euhm.. sicknesses dont fly to you through your window. And here we punish couples with no objective reason. And then there is the point, even if we say we link it, we come to the point where we have to say where do we stop to discuss/talk. At this moment i could accept/try to say "okay lets try it like this. Lets show good spirit and we try it like this." It also reached nearly its end but sometimes it really has to end. For me personally that point was already reached at that moment, at the end of the legislative period. As said, it is a big regret i have and i accept the critic about it. I wouldnt do it again like this, if i would be again in this position like this. But since then, again, alot of time has passed. (A few (2-3) words i cant hear/decipher) we could send a strong signal. There is no reason to not link it, especially if you can say now after years, literally years, that there hasnt been found an agreement about the rest of the responsibility. That is another , more fundemental (bigger) problem. Which isnt as easy to solve as this small sentence in a réglement ministérielle that you madame minister could do on your own. You could emancipate you there if you really want. Thank you.
Guy says that Discussion has ended and they will vote about lenerts motion.
1
u/Mysterious_Ad9416 2d ago
Wow, this was amazing! Thank you so, so much for your time and effort! It is really important for me to understand this. So, as I understood, Deprez wanted to make the blood transfusion center a public entity, but at the end it turned out not to be possible and so she cannot change the rule by herself (without the Croix Rouge agreeing to it) ? I am happy that she wants to do it within this legislative period, but that period ends in 2028, so it is not so soon... Thank you so much once again!!
2
u/orkman198 2d ago
Its like the other person wrote in their summary. The governoment wants to turn it into a public entity and take 100% responsibility but there are problems. Discussions and agreements done with CR before in the previous governoment ... and it would create a dangerous précédent when the state takes control over such organisations. Imagine an evil governoment in the future could use this case and take control over other organisations etc and force them do to what they want. The plan is to solve the problem in this legislative period. And there was critic that every governoment says this in the discussion from the députés inbetween the speech of deprez and lenert and they also say thats it an important isdue, especially as blood reserves are constantly low etc... than for the speeches, especially lenert, there is alot of blabla of stuff i dont understand in this entire story as i am not familiar enough with it .. lenert talking about "there is no reason to not link it" or the thing where deprez could do it on her own and emancipate with the small sentence in the réglement ministérielle.
2
u/Mysterious_Ad9416 2d ago
Thank you so much! Yes, it is probably the issue of responsibility that is the main problem to get this solved. And as you said in a comment on my previous post, this issue needs to be solved appropriately, as it is about health and public trust in blood donation system is very important. Have a good night!
4
u/Nice-Ad1832 2d ago
The way I understand it is that they’d explored the option to turn the blood transfusion centre into a public entity and the state would be responsible for the issue but since blood donation is currently delegated to the Red Cross they cannot simply overrule them because that would create a precedent but that she’s confident (and feels strengthened by the support voiced in parliament) that there’ll be an agreement in due course? Is that the part that you meant?