Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-400"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000705.14.3-400"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in a Europe of economic and monetary union, it could have been an advantage for the MEDIA/MEDIA Plus programme to have Article 157 (industry) of the Treaty as its legal basis. Audiovisual media would, of course, be at the heart of European policy, and also of our work.
Now, reading the preview of this part-session produced by Parliament’s press department, I note that the MEDIA Plus programme is not one of this week’s highlights. And I have been really surprised at the low level of interest aroused by one of this year’s most important reports from the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport – or rather, to tell you the truth, I have not been surprised at all. Culture is not paid much attention in this Parliament, as in all the European Institutions. That must change.
It is not just the audiovisual industry or, I should rather say, the audiovisual sector. Like others Members who have spoken on this subject, I hope Article 151, on culture, can also be a legal basis for this audiovisual programme.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Mrs Hieronymi wholeheartedly for her determination to broaden the basis and the aim, and to develop the resources for this programme, not to mention all the energy she has put into our joint work.
Audiovisual creation does not account for the whole industry, but creation is indeed involved and the purpose of this programme is to make cultural diversity effective and concrete. Cultural diversity is not a slogan. It is a cultural and economic necessity. We urgently need to have audiovisual works distributed in every country in Europe. Grants to cinemas showing non-national European films should be increased. Emphasising the cultural importance of the programme does not mean neglecting its economic importance, of course. By 2005, the audiovisual sector should have been responsible for creating over 300 000 highly qualified jobs. How can people have so little interest in a market likely to grow so rapidly? It seems that neither cultural necessity nor economic objectives carry any weight in favour of implementing this ambitious programme.
As always when culture is involved, the budget is minimal, not to mention the fact that it is always gone ten in the evening by the time we get round to culture here. People may say the budget has been increased compared with the two previous programmes, MEDIA 1 and MEDIA 2. I think not. EUR 250 million for twelve countries and EUR 310 million for sixteen countries is no less than the EUR 400 million now proposed for some thirty countries. Why is such a derisory budget, with no real increase, allocated to a programme which can combine the two objectives Europe so badly needs – the objective of Europe’s identity and Europe’s own diversified culture, and dynamic economic development?
We are told the digital age promises a revolution in the development of content and the distribution of images, and the MEDIA Plus programme devotes space to pilot projects, such as the digital transposition of our audiovisual heritage. Under the circumstances, would it really be responsible not to take the MEDIA Plus programme seriously?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples