Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-408"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000705.14.3-408"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, first of all, I want to thank you for agreeing to put MEDIA Plus on your already very full agenda, despite the fact that we so often get there late at night. But late in the evening is often the time for cultural activities, so we are not really doing anything unusual.
Secondly, one of the acknowledged successes of the MEDIA programme is its adaptation to the needs of businesses in the sector, especially SMEs, through financial and training support mechanisms suited to their practices and strategies. These mechanisms must seek to overcome the obstacles of the national markets and profit fully from an enlarged area of distribution. It is therefore essential for the implementation of MEDIA Plus to be based on professional expertise and for the support mechanisms to be accessible to the greatest possible number of businesses, in all the countries and regions making up our Community. And that implementation must be properly balanced between the needs of the professionals and the need for transparency, and strict control of public expenditure. In particular, Mr Perry, it must respect the financial regulation.
Thirdly and finally, I am pleased to see that Parliament shares the Commission’s opinion on the programme’s target sectors, as well as its wish to see transnational synergies developed. I think the future of the content industry in Europe lies in coproductions. Transnational synergy between the production and distribution sectors will be something new, with a view to a more competitive industry. But when we talk about the culture industry, we are still talking about culture, of course, and we do want our films to travel, we do want to encourage, emphasise and achieve cultural and linguistic diversity. It is not just a requirement of the Treaty, the people want it, and political nous recommends it.
So, ladies and gentlemen, what is the Commission’s position on the proposed amendments? First of all, in the ‘vocational training’ section, I am in a position to accept in full, or in substance, 37 of the 48 amendments presented today. Mr President, I have the list of amendments available. In fact the only amendments I have reservations about relate, of course, to the budget. Ladies and gentlemen, I am really embarrassed to have to stand here and say I cannot accept the figure you propose. Personally, if I were not speaking as a Commissioner, I would consider Parliament’s figure far too low for the objectives we want to attain. Unfortunately, we have a restrictive budgetary authority, and, unfortunately again, we have our governments, which want far less even than the budgetary authority authorises me to want. So you see, I am forced to tell you that your proposals – though not excessive, Mrs Hieronymi – cannot be supported by the Commission.
Another factor is the exclusion of initial training: Amendments Nos 12, 110, 111 and 112. I believe it ought to be possible to support this type of training, but not as a general rule. We should support it as an exception and as a subsidiary activity, when no other support exists at national and European level, and in particular in order to network initial training bodies and give such training a European status.
Another problem is the exclusion of the training areas to be supported by the economic, financial and commercial management training programme: Amendments Nos 113 and 114.
You see, if we want to train professionals effectively, it is essential to teach them to understand the European and international dimensions of the market in their fields – and to do so at European level too. Setting up international coproduction, marketing and distribution in foreign countries are all things our future audiovisual industry workers need to be taught if we want them to operate on an international scale, and that is our aim. So there will be support for economic, financial and commercial management from a European perspective.
My fourth point is the inclusion of training for technical professions in audiovisual media, Amendment No 18, and radio, Amendment No 33. This training is well developed at national level and, as such, it does not require a European dimension like the other proposed training. On the other hand, I am in favour of opening up MEDIA training actions to radio professionals, which may constitute a compromise between Amendments Nos 33 and 34.
Finally, there are two declaratory amendments on encouraging fiscal measures, Amendment No 4, and intellectual property, Amendment No 9. Although these amendments are legitimate in spirit, they go beyond the scope of the decision.
Mr President, I come now to the second part of the proposal for a directive: development, distribution and promotion. I am willing to accept 57 amendments, 80% of the amendments tabled by Parliament, literally or in spirit. I can make the list of these amendments available, Mr President.
I am forced to express reservations on eleven of the amendments tabled. Four of them, Amendments Nos 53, 65, 69 and 93, are declaratory and outside the scope of the decision. Their inclusion, while legitimate in spirit, is not justified in the text of the proposal for a decision.
I also want to thank the Members of Parliament who have worked so intensively on the draft: the members of the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport, of course, but also the various committees the report was referred to for an opinion, and I want to mention the draftsmen, Mrs Echerer, Mr Fiori, Mr Rocard and Mr Wynn. Above all, I would like to add my voice to all those who have highlighted the contribution of the rapporteur, Ruth Hieronymi. We usually do congratulate the rapporteur. It is traditional. But this time I think we can say Mrs Hieronymi’s work has been more than exceptional. She has been a great rapporteur and it is thanks to her that the draft Parliament is submitting to us today is a draft which improves the Commission’s text. We appreciate the rapporteur’s negotiating talent and her personal commitment. Thank you very much, Mrs Hieronymi.
It will come as no surprise that my reservations relate, in particular, to Amendments Nos 44 and 54 on the legal basis. Article 157(3) is the legal basis proposed by the Commission, and Parliament is seeking to add another legal basis, the article on culture. Ladies and gentlemen, I understand your position, but I think Article 157 relating to industry is the appropriate legal basis for this decision – as was already the case for MEDIA 2 – considering its subject matter, its aim and its content. Establishing an industrial policy for audiovisual media does not mean we forget about cultural diversity, because the aim of the culture industry is precisely the achievement, on the ground, of cultural diversity. But the choice, as legal basis, of the article relating to industry conforms to consistent case law which lays down that in the framework of the system of Community powers, the choice of the legal basis of an act must be founded on objective factors capable of jurisdictional control and such factors notably include the aim and the content of the act.
MEDIA Plus is a programme intended to strengthen the competitiveness of the audiovisual sector, but I must stress that one recital, recital 11, highlights, if that were still necessary, the cultural dimension of the audiovisual sector, in accordance with Article 151(4) of the Treaty.
I note your concerns and I really hope that the next revision of the Treaty will offer a new framework, as well measures enabling the European Parliament to be fully involved in decisions on audiovisual policy.
As regards Amendment No 87 on the budget for the second section, my comment is the same as for the amendment on the budget for the training section. So I need not go over it again. As regards Amendment No 103 on radio, MEDIA Plus cannot be extended to other sectors given the financial constraints, but I have already made one concession, in the training section, to including radio in the programme.
On Amendments Nos 115 and 116, regional and minority languages, the Commission is, as you know, very concerned about respect and promotion of linguistic and cultural diversity. Moreover, this concern is taken into account throughout the MEDIA Plus programme, primarily through positive discrimination measures in the support mechanisms in favour of professionals operating in countries and regions with low production capacity and with a limited geographic or linguistic scope.
Amendment No 115 would create a sub-programme within the programme. So I do not think we should go that far. But Amendment No 116 actually does nothing more than take up and specify the measures which are already scattered throughout the programme. So, if Parliament really wants it, and so decides, I will not oppose that amendment.
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr President, beyond these few points of disagreement, which are minimal, I want to express my satisfaction at the cooperation and the many points of agreement between the Commission and Parliament. The amendments proposed today, which are of a high quality, will undoubtedly make it possible to improve the texts establishing the MEDIA programme. They will contribute to achieving our goal: the creation of a strong content industry in Europe. With our MEDIA Plus programme we are seeking to complete all the other actions which should restore to the European cinema not its credibility, because that was never lost, but its confidence, because it is by having confidence in the ability of the European cinema that we will succeed in developing it as we all wish.
Mr President, as you know, the Commission sets great store by the European Parliament’s opinion, especially with the Culture Council coming up on 20-21 July, because it is my job to let the ministers know the views of the European Parliament. In this way, discussions between the Commission and the Council can progress usefully, not just on the basis of the Commission’s proposal, but also on the basis of the position expressed by Parliament.
Do not expect me to launch into a speech on the importance of European cinema. I have done that many times, in many places. You know my views on the subject; I share yours, but we are here this evening to produce the best possible draft.
I have taken note of the 116 amendments presented today with great interest: 48 of them relate to the proposal for a decision on vocational training and 68 to development, distribution and promotion. All the amendments bear witness to a broad consensus in Parliament about the way the Commission has approached the MEDIA programme. There are many practical proposals for the implementation of the programme and some of Parliament’s concerns shine through these amendments. I must say the Commission broadly shares them, just as I share most of the views expressed this evening, here in the House.
The first consideration is the acknowledged importance of the audiovisual content sector in Europe’s economy and society, now and in the future, and the need to take account of the new opportunities available, especially thanks to the new technologies, including digital technology. That challenge means that MEDIA Plus must take greater account of the new technologies. That is not, however, enough. We must also follow up the Lisbon Summit, by opening up other Community initiatives.
As you are right to point out, we cannot afford to invest in production. Producing a single major film would swallow up the entire MEDIA budget. That is why we have tried to use MEDIA to complement what the Member States should be and are doing, but that is not enough either, and some speakers have justifiably mentioned the abortive experiment with a guarantee fund in the past. We are working to recreate such a fund.
Indeed, I have been in touch with the president of the European Investment Bank. We both agreed that, in order to develop the content industry in Europe, risk capital needs to be made more available and instruments established to aid investment in audiovisual content. My officers and those of the European Investment Bank are negotiating along these lines, to establish such an investment fund as soon as possible, in the spirit of eEurope as recommended in Lisbon and confirmed in Feira. When things start to move along I will certainly come to this House to keep you informed of progress, Mr President.
I also agree that Community policy on audiovisual media should have a wider scope but should be developed as a complement to national and regional policies in this field, and synergistically with these."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples