Speeches

Mr President! A European media freedom law must meet some expectations: consistently defend media freedom, whether online or offline, protect journalists and enable media diversity. This has only been achieved to a limited extent. When it comes to measures to ensure the independence of public service media, the text falls short of the Commission proposal. While there has been progress in protecting journalists, there are still too many loopholes that could put an end to this progress. Journalists should not be spied on or arrested just for doing their job. In the end, online platforms from the USA or even China can still decide according to their own rules which content we are allowed to see and which are not professionally created by recognized media providers. I think that's absurd. We also disregard our own rules. We rightly demand the independence and independence of the national supervisory authorities from the Member States in order to establish, at the same time as the European Media Freedom Act, the newly created body of national media supervisory authorities directly in the Commission, which then also determines the staff. We are thus opening the door wide to establishing the Commission as a European media supervisory authority, a task which it simply does not have and which contradicts all previous rules, because the Commission is neither independent nor independent of the state. All in all: Yes, there is progress; In my view, however, the text cannot really meet the high standards that we should all place on media freedom and pluralism as a prerequisite for the functioning of our democracy.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner! The Audiovisual Media Services Directive is better than their reputation. Again and again, the AVMSD was cited in order to find the justification or need for it. In doing so, the text was wronged in several respects. The text of the revised Directive is not weak. A weak picture was given at most by the Member States, which are very hesitant to transpose the directive and hardly implement it within the given deadline. Weak was also the Commission's appearance, which was also far too hesitant to remind Member States of their obligations, to request transposition and, if necessary, to open infringement proceedings. Many regulations that have been newly implemented cannot be evaluated in terms of their effect or can only be evaluated insufficiently four years after adoption. The establishment and legal anchoring of ERGA as an association of national independent regulatory authorities must be seen as a success. It has led to increased cross-border cooperation. ERGA will, therefore, rightly participate in the future Media Freedom Act to one board However, contrary to what the Commission envisages, this must be established independently of the Commission as a European instrument for promoting media freedom and diversity, without prejudice to independent and well-functioning systems in the Member States. A new rule has also been introduced, which states that in the flood of information that we encounter online, there must be the possibility of making more visible in editorial independence and professionally produced media content of general interest. The implementation of this idea is certainly a challenge here and there, but the basic idea is more important than ever. Platforms are increasingly abusing their economic power as gatekeepers to exercise media power, leading to a constraint on diversity. Unfortunately, only a few Member States have so far made use of the possibilities offered by the AVMS. We have also once again passionately debated the pros and cons of quotas when terminating this report. Due to the delayed implementation, however, it is not really possible today to assess whether the introduction of a quota for European works on video-on-demand platforms has brought the hoped-for boost to the European film industry. This requires extensive research, which we call on the Commission to do. However, we reject any restriction on the definition of European works and call for a definition to be included in the relevant Council of Europe Convention. I am totally with those who demand a diversity of European works. We need not only many European works, but also many successful European works that are accepted by the widest possible audience. The Hollywood movie will certainly retain its appeal. But we also know that Europeans want European stories that are closer to their own lives. That is why I would like all of us, the Commission, the Member States, but also us MEPs, to have more courage and determination to create a competitive environment in a modern, open, freedom-loving and inspiring EU media landscape that will ensure that we, as the EU, will continue to have a strong global position in the film business. For this, we need innovative European approaches in addition to specifications and commitments. Let's start this debate together on a fact-based, non-ideological and blinder-free basis – for more diversity, for colourful, exciting, informative and people-enriching media content. The AVMS is a good basis for this, which needs to be further developed. We need sector-specific regulation that takes into account the specificities of the media as a cultural and economic asset, sets out a European framework without falling into equilibrium, and takes into account the specificities and diversity of the media landscapes in the Member States.

Madam President, Commissioner Gabriel! The situation in European cooperation, especially in voluntary youth welfare, is deteriorating rapidly. The European Year of Youth has not changed that either. Due to COVID, structures have virtually collapsed and only need to be restored with a great deal of extra effort. We are also experiencing cost explosions in this area, and this ultimately makes measures, especially in youth welfare, almost unaffordable, especially for those who need them most urgently. There is also a shortage of skilled workers in the voluntary sector, but above all also in the professional workforce. Volunteering needs professional accompaniment, and so the gaps in youth work and youth welfare structures across Europe are intensifying. I think doing nothing here would be a testament to poverty, especially after the somewhat botched European Year of Youth. I therefore ask the Commission: What is the Commission planning to do to counteract these really dangerous developments, especially in the field of European youth work?

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! A study published Monday shows: More than two-thirds of young people worry about the future and evaluate the general situation worse than ever before. War in Europe, inflation, climate change, the economic and energy crisis create a massive sense of insecurity; The European Year of Youth could not change that. And like a year ago, I stand here and make the same demands: Get rid of unpaid internships! Appropriate remuneration for work done is a matter of respect and equity for young people. I don't want only young people from rich parents' homes to be able to afford an internship. And let's work together on structures that ensure a tangible participation of young people in the long term! Instead of acting, however, the Commission has preferred to use event mapping to demonstrate that it can also do cartographic work. More than 8 000 activities were mapped, many of which would have taken place anyway. So this hard work served rather the self-affirmation. The year went largely unnoticed by the young people, without anything coming out for them. That is why we are calling for the year to be extended until 8 May 2023 in order to finally deliver something in the additional time that could still help the year succeed. Finally, put forward a proposal to ban unpaid traineeships and at least propose Council conclusions on the involvement of children and young people in political decisions at all levels! No one is interested in a half-baked youth test, which is more like a supervised discussion group than that it represents real co-determination. Let's work together on these measures by 9 May and get them off the ground – otherwise the European Year of Youth will remain a farce.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine exacerbates the plight of the already financially fragile cultural sector. The consequences of the COVID crisis are far from over. Rising energy costs and inflation are creating new problems. But culture is more than the intellectual enjoyment of operas, museums, theatres and music halls. Culture means arguing, discussing, alarming. Culture creates public discourse. The task of cultural policy is therefore to enable and make visible culture in all its diversity. The practice of culture in public space is the guarantee of the human right to culture and at the same time enables a critical examination of political decisions and social conditions. If culture is pushed out of public space, an important part of public discourse is withdrawn from the community as a whole. However, this critical-constructive task will only be able to be carried out well by cultural enterprises that are sure to get through the crises safely. Politics must provide the financial and structural security that art and culture dare to do something, sometimes they can also do something for us. Because it is not only the aesthetically appealing, but precisely the committed and judgmental, sometimes also polarizing culture that brings us forward as a society. That is why we need fast, effective national and European mechanisms to ensure this security. We have made some suggestions on this. Dear colleagues, with targeted acts of violence such as direct attacks on cultural heritage sites, the Russian army is pursuing the goal of Ukrainian identity destruction. Cultural workers and journalists in Ukraine live in constant fear. Here I would like to remind you of the conductor of the Kherson Philharmonic, Yuri Kerpatenko, who was allegedly murdered by Russian occupiers a few days ago. He probably died because he didn't want to mess with Russian propaganda. Under the prevailing conditions, culture cannot develop the value that is of such special importance. It must be ensured that a free-form Ukrainian culture has a firm place in Ukrainian society and does not fall victim to Putin's aggression. We have also made some suggestions on how we can help. Yes, art and culture have often been politically instrumentalized in history. And yes, there are artists who defend or even approve of Putin's war of aggression. But let's not forget: Art and culture are often enough expressions of resistance to oppression. There appear to be an increasing number of cases in the EU where works by Russian artists are removed from the libraries, the engagement of conductors, singers, ballet dancers is terminated or Russian writers are unloaded. We would do well not to introduce a culture of confession. As long as individuals do not actively stand up for Putin's policies against human rights or openly reject our liberal democratic basic order, they must not be disadvantaged either by their passport or by a lack of political attitude. Freedom also means not positioning yourself politically. As we show unconditional solidarity with Ukraine, we must at the same time defend ourselves against the exclusion of Russian artists and cultural workers who do not support this war of aggression. What's more: Banning Dostoevsky and Tchaikovsky from the repertoire is not an expression of political correctness, it is simply nonsense. And we should not forget: Culture can build bridges – perhaps not now, but hopefully in the not-too-distant future.

Mr President! In both regulations, the Committee on Culture and Education considered it necessary to strengthen professional journalism and to protect the dissemination of editorially responsible content. We have largely succeeded in this in the DMA. With his help, we will be able to prevent large platforms from exploiting their dominant position through their respective contractual provisions, which directly protects the diversity of the press and media. However, we are in Digital Services Act failed to fully protect editorially responsible media content created by professional journalists, which is already subject to complete control under media law, from a right of access and control by platforms. I also take the view that the rights granted to the Commission in the area of content control go far too far from the point of view of the absence of the State. From a media-political point of view, both are, I think, a moderately serious catastrophe. Media freedom threatens to be undermined. EU law must not relativise or even ignore the value of professional, diverse journalism in the press, on the radio or online. The opposite of ‘good’ is ‘well meant’. This should be reflected in the Commission's proposals on: Media Freedom Act Take it to heart.

Madam President, The Committee on Culture has issued opinions on the discharge of the Commission budget of DG Education and Culture and the Translation Centre for the EU institutions, certifying that both institutions have used the budget correctly, while also providing details on optimisation. I would like to thank the Directorate-General and the Translation Centre for their work. In view of the pandemic, this was anything but ordinary and not always easy. And the education and cultural sectors still face enormous challenges to this day. However, they all work together in a very disciplined and performance-oriented way. Despite all the criticism, this praise should not be left unmentioned here. With regard to the Commission's website, an increasing number of attempts are being made to get closer to citizens, to provide explanations on proposals, to prepare action weeks and to offer short videos. That's good, but it clearly dominates English. The people on the ground do not necessarily feel addressed. As far as linguistic diversity is concerned, I think there is a clear need for improvement here. If we want to help shape public space here and want people to help shape it, then we have to pick them up in their languages.

Madam President, This report could hardly be more up-to-date. While he also exposes and clearly identifies disinformation in the EU by foreign regimes, he also shows how we can effectively counteract it beyond – in my view – ill-considered quick shots such as bans and blockades. We have an urgent need to catch up on digital and media education, and the report rightly highlights the importance of pluralistic, diverse and independent media. If we want to protect our democracy, we must do more for media literacy and to strengthen independent journalism in the press, radio, television and online. Only in this way can we defend a liberal media order. Such an intervention will prove to be defensive without further intervention by the state. A strong and liberal media landscape manages by itself to uncover and correctly classify stupidity and nonsense. To sacrifice media freedom to protect our democracy would be a grave mistake, because one is not without the other. Congratulations on the report, but please let us work together to translate the findings into action now.

Mr President! Two thirds of the 15- to 24-year-olds surveyed recently consider the EU to be a good project for the future. At the same time, three out of four people find the future as a whole frightening. Rarely have young people been as hopeless as they are today. I don't think that should leave us cold. We need to open up new perspectives for young people through education in the broadest sense. It starts with the little ones: We finally need more commitment to EU-wide free access to quality early childhood education. The pandemic has shown us how important the place school is for the development of the entire personality. The upgrading of the teaching profession, good remuneration and continuous training remain just as much a challenge as the EU-wide creation of all-day offers, the meaningful involvement of partners in extracurricular education and youth work, the upgrading of the subjects of art, music and sport, the special focus on STEM, language acquisition. The homework list is long! Designing school as a place that is fun and open even in difficult times remains a Herculean task. But we still approach them far too timidly. European social democracy has long called for 10% of gross domestic product in the Member States to be invested in education. The children should be worth it to us, and that would be well spent money. The Commission's commitment to higher education is correct. However, an equally high level of commitment is required in vocational education and training. Vocational training must be valued as much as studying. We lack well-trained specialists in the entire professional spectrum. This requires a societal rethink. And finally, countries must finally get away from being against automatic mutual recognition of diplomas and learning periods obtained abroad. That must be given up. We simply can no longer afford the brakes on mobility. The Year of Youth must be a wake-up call to do everything possible to ensure that everyone can achieve social advancement through education, regardless of their parents' wallets.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. The DSA is a good opportunity to strengthen users' rights, i.e. to achieve real improvements for democratic life, which is taking place more and more online, while at the same time strengthening media freedom. The former worked well – a lot has been achieved here. Many thanks to Christel Schaldemose as rapporteur! The second, on the other hand, has failed and, from a media policy point of view, is a moderately serious catastrophe. Once again, it has become clear that if the Culture and Media Committee is not sufficiently involved in digital legislation, it will not help us as a whole. Not a single one of our demands has been accepted, and so the text is rather damaging to journalism and the media. Not only do we consolidate the position of large platforms here, in case of doubt about their profit, to decide which professional media and press content is part of our democratic debates in Europe. Parliament’s position also completely overrides the competence of the Member States in the fields of culture, media and diversity promotion, and I believe that diversity promotion – media diversity and media freedom – is one of the best means of disinformation and Fake news to fight. I would urge everyone in this House not to let individual campaigns drive you crazy and to vote for amendments that protect professionally produced media content. I feel that amendments are not understood or even read. Many arguments have nothing at all to do with the amendments that are actually put to the vote. Yes, the CULT Committee had wished for a wide-ranging media exception that protects editorially responsible content, which is already subject to a wide range of supervision and control, from deletion. However, this has not reached a majority in the IMCO Committee; We have to accept that. Amendments 511 and 513 now tabled are therefore aimed solely at ensuring that platforms respect media freedom in their terms and conditions and that media providers have a right to be heard when deciding on the deletion and blocking of content. This should be a matter of course, but that is far from enough. But that must be the least that's in the DSA. I therefore urge you all to vote in favour of these two amendments. Finally, I must say that the hypocrisy of some groups in this House when it comes to freedom of the media only leaves me somewhat stunned. "In case of doubt for the freedom of the media" no longer seems to be a priority in this House.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Mariya Gabriel! The European Year of Youth 2022 is coming at the right time if the expectations set for the year are actually fulfilled in the end. Because it can't be about celebrating some nice events and events with young people in the next twelve months, and that's it. The year is the chance to finally give unpaid internships the necessary cancellation. Parliament has already called for this in two resolutions and called on the Commission to put forward appropriate proposals. It is an opportunity to give greater importance to the value of youth work and informal and non-formal education. It is an opportunity not only to constantly talk about participation, but also to actually live it, and to finally systematically implement the wishes and demands articulated to us in the existing EU Youth Dialogue. We now have the opportunity to noticeably advance the mutual automatic recognition of learning periods and thus stimulate the desired mobility in education. Let us seize this opportunity to make our entire European policy more youth-friendly. The legal framework is here now. It is now up to us, above all, to make the European Year a success. We all have a duty to meet the high expectations of young people. The pandemic and the measures taken to combat it have demanded a lot from young people in particular, depriving them of part of their childhood and youth. It is now up to us to make up for this, at least in part, through a good policy that puts children and young people at the centre of our actions. I hope for a great success this year, and it's really up to us.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, As much as I fully welcome the basic idea of banning from the outset commercial practices that endanger diversity, I must equally state that Parliament's current position does not take sufficient account of the impact on the media sector. Despite all the promises made to the Culture Committee, a simple statement will ultimately have a detrimental effect on the media and culture sector. There is a lack of clear demarcation from the Audiovisual Media Services Directive in the articles and the clarification that the DMA-scheme which: AVMS not affected. In addition, the text of the article does not explicitly allow Member States to take diversity-enhancing measures in the media sector. Quality journalism and diverse media are essential for our democracy and also one of the most effective means against disinformation and fake news. Also Connected TV In my view, there is nothing to look for in the text, especially since this is already conceptually a description of a device and not a service. In my view, a lot of detailed work is still needed in the trilogue if interoperability, differentiation from media, rules for data sharing and data protection are to be optimally balanced. I very much hope that this trilogue also applies: Thoroughness before speed. I wish all negotiators every success.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, This report underpins the need and priorities for an EU sport policy. The pandemic is also exacerbating existing problems in sport, both in grassroots and elite sport. The report therefore calls on the Member States to strengthen grassroots sport and sports infrastructure, particularly in rural areas, both financially and in terms of personnel, because this is a matter of sheer existence for clubs and structures. The grassroots sport is not only a talent forge of top-class sport: We must recognise its indispensable importance for the personal development, health and social participation of all, especially children, and equip it accordingly. In the education component of sport, too, all Member States, including sports federations, must deliver more and finally implement existing EU guidelines on the compatibility of sport and dual training. The clubs have a responsibility for young athletes and must finally take care of them in an all-encompassing way. In professional sports, however, the example of the so-called Super League shows where the journey could go. We need reform, not a Super League. The Super League destroys the sport and does not protect the sport. We also call for movement among sports federations, Member States and the Commission to create better visibility of women's sport in the media and a zero-tolerance policy on violence and racism in sport. The report shows that there is no shortage of ideas at all. What is needed, however, is a consistent implementation of our demands by the Member States, the Commission and the sports federations and the respect of European values in all aspects of sport. Fair play is not only on the pitch, but also in sports policy as a whole.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! Europe's cultural diversity is invaluable. It strengthens our social cohesion, improves our quality of life, strengthens our democracy and, last but not least, is of enormous economic importance. Most of the almost nine million jobs in the cultural sector are either self-employed or part-time, which usually results in extremely precarious income situations for artists, which have been exacerbated by the pandemic. This shows very clearly that we need to help this industry with special attention through the ongoing crisis. But above all, we must provide cultural professionals and institutions with a better social and economic foundation in the long term. The aim is to provide cultural workers in all employment relationships with a good income and a social safety net that actually deserves this name – especially for young artists. This is another reason why it was important for the European Parliament to call for 2% of the Recovery Fund for the cultural and creative sectors at an early stage. Unfortunately, Member States have implemented this very poorly. It is also nice that we were able to achieve a large budget surcharge for the Creative Europe programme, but unfortunately in the end only a drop in the bucket. But we need to achieve more in the medium to long term. I am glad that the report addresses the dominant role of major music streaming providers, whose unfair practices in remuneration and referral systems make it difficult for young and small female artists to breathe, and other points are also raised. I think we have come up with a good report here. I thank everyone, and I hope that the words will actually be followed by action.