Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-02-02-Speech-4-009"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060202.3.4-009"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, we are right to be concerned about the European Union’s communication problems and we are right, as the title of this White Paper puts it, to be debating Europe and to be involving people. The diagnosis is clear and the White Paper is detailed in its prescriptions for dealing with the problem.
I wish to thank the Commissioner warmly for the efforts she has invested in taking us this far in addressing this crucial problem. We will be discussing many of the group proposals in detail later. I would like to use this opportunity to make some general remarks about communications in general.
In communications less is more. The essence of good communication is to put a strong message in simple language. We need to explain to the people what we are doing and why it matters to them. Once they know that their interests are affected by our decisions, they will take care of the public sphere themselves.
The White Paper seeks investment in mechanisms, procedures and new technology to facilitate the channels of communication. That is a good thing, but it does not address the quality of what is to be sent down those channels of communication. It talks about connecting the citizens and about public-sphere debating. That is acceptable to us. However, before people do any of this, they have to care. Only then can they be empowered. We have to show them why they should care about what the European Union is doing. The responsibility in dealing with those problems lies with us all – all the institutions – and not only with the press room downstairs. Partnership is, therefore, also an important concept put forward in the White Paper.
As I said, it would be good to invest in new websites and our own TV channels, but we already have the world’s largest group of accredited correspondents on our doorstep: 1300 journalists who are hungry to report good-quality stories to audiences all over the world. If we produced timely and newsworthy stories for journalists, then the headlines, websites, new TV channels and public-sphere debates will follow.
However, the reality is that most of our communication efforts are foundering because the EU fails on the basic issues. The EU offers one-size-fits-all news announcements instead of making more strenuous efforts to find new messages to capture the interest of specific media groups in our different countries and regions.
Quite rightly, the White Paper places some emphasis on opinion polling and the need to understand European public opinion. But if it uses this resource correctly, why does the Commission persist in coming forward with such deeply unpopular proposals like the port services directive that we dealt with a month ago? The White Paper talks about the need to listen to the people, and rightly so. Here was a case of the Commission not even listening to its own Parliament, never mind the people. On that point, it is not enough to say that Europe needs to listen to the people: it also needs to act on what they say. What is the incentive for people to talk to us in Brussels if they have no assurance that what they say will matter or change what we are thinking of doing?
I welcome this White Paper because it is kick-starting a much-needed debate. This House should welcome the Commissioner’s important contribution. We in the European Parliament must play our part in ensuring that the European Union develops with the support of its citizens and that it serves their interests in the best possible way."@en1
|
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples