Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-04-20-Speech-2-462"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040420.20.2-462"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, if you will allow me a touch of irony – which may at this moment be a ruse to escape from such a sensitive debate – I should like to say that the election campaign by the Italian Left for the European elections is officially opening this evening here in the European Parliament.
The document that we are discussing has, in fact, been hijacked by a hidden agenda – depriving the cultural, scientific and technical research that the title announces of any value – even though the fact that the title itself picks out Italy as a country in which freedom of information is allegedly under greater threat than elsewhere, gives an early indication of biased conclusions that are simply meant to hurt the Italian Government and particularly its Prime Minister.
In support of this report, the rapporteur presents the conclusions of a study carried out by a Düsseldorf institute – which was never authorised by this Parliament – with findings that are anything but clear and definitive. The study starts by announcing its aim of comparing the information situation in the 25 Member States; it then provides a few data on only eight countries, explicitly pointing out the provisional nature and shortcomings of this survey. A question springs to mind, Mr President, which I put to this Chamber: why the hurry? Why not wait until the study was complete with the full complement of 25 countries? I could give an answer, but perhaps I am too cynical.
The original text has been padded out with a raft of amendments that present the situation in Italy in a paradoxical light, to say the least, with personal references and criticisms of the Italian Prime Minister that are not in keeping with the style and language of the European Parliament. The President, Pat Cox, wrote as much in a letter today, in which he called on the rapporteur to correct the tone and cut out the personal references. The rapporteur has indeed proposed a few cosmetic touches – as she describes them – as a gesture of willingness. Frankly, Mrs Boogerd-Quaak, they are not enough. What is needed here is a complete face-lift to restore some dignity to the resolution.
The situation in Italy is very different from the way it is described. This is confirmed by a report last year by Reporters Without Borders, an organisation that is certainly not close to the Italian Government or its Prime Minister; on the contrary, it is highly critical. Nevertheless, it states that the Italian press on the whole reflects the variety of political positions that are expressed in Parliament and presents an exhaustive spread of opinions that is often critical of the government. The report then analyses the various affinities of the news programmes on television and radio, the daily press and periodicals, etc., and comments: ‘While the print media offer a range of political views that fairly reflect the reality of the Italian political arena, they suffer economically from the broadcast media’s dominance.’ Finally – the last point – it says that the print media as a whole are unfavourable to the government and the ruling majority.
Where, then, Mr President, is the truth? It is a shame, because one just cannot see where the truth lies. This report could have helped to uphold it. We know where it is. Unfortunately, the report betrays it and mortifies it."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples