Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-27-Speech-3-224"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991027.8.3-224"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, firstly, I would like to warmly congratulate your rapporteur on his excellent work, and the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, Media and Sport for the support it has given to the rapporteur. I would like to tell you how much the Commission appreciates the fact that the rapporteur for the “Culture 2000” programme is one of today’s major poets. I would like to tell you, although this is perhaps only anecdotal, that one of Mr Graça Moura’s books is to be translated into Swedish this year thanks to the Ariane programme. That just shows that European culture does travel!
I have listened carefully to all your demands for the budget. I agree with you wholeheartedly, but we cannot ignore the
and, as you well know, the budgetary authorities do not always share our views. I am therefore forced to maintain my original position on amendment 3 and cannot accept the proposal seeking to raise the budget from EUR 167 million to EUR 250 million. The three institutions are in fact committed to respecting the budgetary programme and only the budgetary authorities can implement a modification. Of course, if such a modification were to be implemented, the Commission would be delighted, but given the current state of affairs, I feel compelled to refuse this amendment.
Rapporteur, ladies and gentlemen, I am delighted that we are able to vote for “Culture 2000” today. This will be a new starting point for our citizens who expect us, in addition to taking economic action, to make the people, the culture, the roots and the diversity that contribute to the richness of Europe our central concern.
It is from this perspective, and in the hope that we will be able to make rapid progress in the direction our citizens wish, that I ask you to vote for this report.
Your rapporteur has submitted a very constructive report, based on an in-depth analysis of the needs of cultural cooperation. The report clearly shows, if it were still necessary, Parliament’s commitment to this programme and to the cultures of Europe.
The “Culture 2000” programme is the first framework-programme for culture. It will enable us to develop a common cultural area designed to encourage creativity, cooperation and exchanges, one which will safeguard the heritage and history of the European peoples, generate a greater understanding of them, and which will encourage cultures to flourish. You have stressed, both in your speeches and even, previously, during our brief encounters in the corridors of Parliament, the positive aspects and the things which can be improved in the day-to-day running of this programme. I have taken careful note of the problems relating to the breakdown of funds, the implementation of specific programmes and the treatment of languages. I would like to thank you above all, though, for the speed with which you have worked. This is in the interests of our citizens because, as you know, the conciliation procedure between Parliament and the Council must begin quickly so that our citizens will be able to feel the benefits of our “Culture 2000” programme in the year 2000.
I am aware of Parliament’s expectations and I want to say quite clearly that I share them. This is why the Commission can accept most of the amendments introduced by Parliament. These are amendments 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 14. I am not now going to repeat the content of these amendments, as you know them better than I do. I would just like to say that, in principle, the Commission accepts amendment 4 on commitology, on condition that there is a simple cross-reference in the text to the management procedure laid down by the decision of the Council on 28 June 1999, which sets out the conditions for exercising the competences for implementation granted to the Commission. I would also like to make an observation on amendment 12: The Commission accepts this amendment although we would like to maintain a certain degree of flexibility in order to be able, in the conciliation phase, to bring the positions of the Council and Parliament more into line on this specific point.
I propose to partially accept amendments 7, 11 and 13. Amendment 7, on integrated action within the transnational cultural cooperation agreements, consists of two parts. The first concerns the role of the committee and, more specifically, the obligation of the managers of projects that we have financed, to submit a report of the action it has undertaken directly to the committee, because supervision is the task of the Commission, which must also take responsibility for the management of the programme. Secondly, there is the part that envisages specifying “heritage specialists”. The Commission cannot accept the use of this very general term, which would make the list of the programme’s potential beneficiaries much longer, with practical consequences that are impossible to foresee. This does not mean, of course, that we do not accept the preservation of our heritage, quite the opposite. This has been well provided for in the Parliament amendments which we have accepted.
I have just one observation regarding that part of amendment 7 which the Commission has accepted, and this concerns terminology. We should actually use the terms “Member or Associate States”. This is quite a small correction.
We can accept amendment 11 relating to the role of information by means of cultural contact points on condition that their regional activities, which can be conducted as a complement to their national role, are done so on the basis of the measures in force in the various Member States and that they do not involve any increase in the Community’s overall financial contribution. The Commission will obviously discuss with the Member States the breakdown of this aid between the national and regional levels.
The Commission accepts amendment 13 which proposes criteria relating to the distribution of the budget among the main cultural fields, whilst raising from 9% to 11% the percentage in favour of activities in the books and reading sector whose annual subsidy would decrease slightly in relation to the Ariane project. This will certainly please your rapporteur."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples