Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-18-Speech-1-056"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021118.4.1-056"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, my group has tabled this question on media concentration and I must say I am very happy that the initiative has spread throughout the House, because we consider that this is not a single-party or single-group issue, but a concern over a matter of constitutional importance to the Union.
We did this because, ten years ago, the Commission put forward a Green Paper on pluralism and the internal market, and proposed – and even drew up – a preliminary draft directive to harmonise national legislation on media ownership. Since then, nothing has happened, and the Commission, which has the monopoly on initiative, should also show that it deserves this right.
Many things have happened over the past ten years. Significant technological progress has been made – the Internet over written media, cable, satellite television, digital technology – which have transformed the landscape. A concentration process has also taken place which goes beyond our borders and means that certain names have spread and now represent the media throughout Europe, such as Murdoch and Berlusconi. Others have fallen by the wayside, such as Messier and Kirsch, and others are arriving, such as Bloomberg. We must also take account of the developments that are taking place in the United States, where the federal authorities are making changes in order to increase US technological capacity.
In any event, however, Mr President, my group thinks this is above all a democratic issue, because it refers to one of the bases of the system we live in, namely the protection of freedom of speech, which is one of the cornerstones of a democratic society. I am not only referring to freedom of speech as we politicians defend it, but also to freedom of speech for all citizens and also for workers in the press and the media, because it does not make sense for us always to advocate greater democracy for workers in other sectors but not in this one. This should also be extended to the candidate countries, where concern is spreading over the loss of the national character of the media.
Therefore, Commissioner, allow me to play devil’s advocate. I said that no progress had been made in ten years. Why has no progress been made? It would be interesting to analyse the matter. Is it because it is very complicated? European construction has always been a challenge and what I would therefore say is that if the directive was necessary, and it was necessary to address this issue, in 1992, it is all the more necessary now.
Secondly – and this is another of the questions we posed – it could be considered that the legal basis is insufficient. Ten years ago, however, it would appear that it was sufficient. It would be interesting if the Commission were to explain this to us, or otherwise tell us whether it would be appropriate, for example, for this issue to be considered as a matter of fundamental rights in the Commission proposal to the Convention.
Lastly, Mr President, we are aware that this is what is known as a cross-cutting issue. I must say that I am very happy that it is the Commissioner responsible for the protection of consumer rights and health who is to respond to this question, because we are always told that this issue concerns the internal market or competition. It is more than that. It concerns competition, the internal market, culture and fundamental rights. There were four Commissioners I was thinking might appear, and it was a pleasant surprise to see Mr Byrne, who also has to defend us as consumers against this uncontrolled invasion not only of audiovisual messages, which are frequently subliminal, but also against uncontrolled advertising and the monopoly in the field of advertising.
I therefore hope that today’s debate, in which all the parliamentary groups are participating and showing interest, will be a step forward, breaking this ten-year silence and allowing the Commission to exercise its monopoly on initiatives in this fundamental area responsibly."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples