Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is difficult to define cultural diversity, a concept just as complicated and complex as that of culture itself. Cultures are constantly subject to a changing and moving process and this dynamism is an impulse for human progress. Nevertheless, we shall have to produce a formal definition of cultural policy, cultural goods and services, and of course cultural diversity, particularly in connection with agreements under the aegis of international organisations like the WTO or the proposed international instrument on cultural diversity. In a Eurobarometer survey on enlargement in April 2003, Europe’s citizens described culture as one of the major winners in the enlargement process, alongside environment and trade. This testifies to the international organisations’ commitment to safeguarding and promoting cultural diversity. Cultural diversity forms an integral part of the European Union’s identity, and will include other cultures after the accession of the new countries. The EU’s external borders are shifting towards a faultline with very different cultural regions. From 2004, the European Union will be the direct neighbour of Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova. Parallels and similarities can be identified despite the existing differences, which can be explained through migration and intercultural dialogue. The aim, especially in view of enlargement, is to create stronger relations among both minority and marginalised cultures and stronger cultures so that no cultural conflict occurs, but instead cultural dialogue promotes mutual understanding in the interests of peace. Safeguarding cultural diversity does not mean fencing it in and preserving it. It means opening it up, offering individual development and marketing opportunities without subjecting it to current market mechanisms. It is the basic pillar for identity and an economic factor at the same time. This means that we must work not only to protect but also to promote cultural diversity. We must place it in an international context so that exchange, development and dialogue can take place. For example, the music and film industries appear to be very lucrative sectors in the context of international trade, especially if we look more closely at the market share of films in the European Union in 2000: American films accounted for 73%, national films in the home country 15%, and national films outside the home country 8%. Many people only became aware of the Commission’s negotiations in the WTO framework through the Stop GATS campaign. Due to their lack of transparency, these negotiations caused a great deal of upset and were thus the focus of public attention. This lack of transparency has also caused doubts and fears that liberalisation is going too far, and has reinforced the view among cultural actors that the goal of international competitiveness takes precedence over the defence of cultural diversity. Cultural services and products are still exempt from trade liberalisation at present, but this is not secure in the long term. Public education systems currently also fall outside the scope of GATS. This must continue in order to safeguard free access, equal opportunities and quality. Privately financed education markets have largely been liberalised. What we are demanding is that there should be no more forced liberalisation in this area. We must prevent the goal of international competitiveness from negatively impacting on cultural diversity. That means that the protection of funding instruments and therefore of cultural diversity should not be achieved within the WTO and GATS, but through the adoption of a Convention on Cultural Diversity in the framework of UNESCO. It is gratifying that UNESCO has decided, by a large majority, to launch work towards the elaboration of a draft Convention, and I hope that this will proceed very swiftly, for we need a decision very quickly here. Promotion – as well as protection – is essential, as I have already said, to maintain cultural diversity. European cultural policy must go hand in hand with pro-active and autonomous national cultural policies and indeed, in some areas, greater decentralisation in the regions and municipalities. The different levels should not replace but must complement each other. The internal market and hence the free trade in services must not take precedence over national funding mechanisms. Through greater cooperation between international organisations, the unique character of cultures worldwide should be safeguarded and promoted. (Applause)

Political group: PSE