WRITTEN QUESTION E-1661/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (14 May 1997)

Subject: Aid for small national producers of cinematographic and television products in the European Union

The adoption of MEDIA-1 programme signalled the European Union's political determination to support European cinema, and within this framework it launched a number of initiatives aimed at supporting film producers in the small countries of the European Union (the SCALE initiative). However, with the expiry of MEDIA-1 in December 1995, all the programmes in favour of small national film producers also came to an end, and the MEDIA - 2 programme unfortunately makes no provision for comparable initiatives: the three programmes it comprises (development of cinematographic projects, training and distribution) benefit almost exclusively cinematographic and television producers in the large Member States of the Union. The conclusion is that the European Union is in thrall to a two-speed cinematographic policy, and as a result small national cinematographic companies are being marginalized and face total extinction.

Will the Commission say how it intends to express its political determination to support small film producers in the European Union, what action it is taking to support them and whether it intends to launch parallel programmes - without waiting for MEDIA - 2 to expire - to save cinematographic production in the small EU countries which accounts for a significant share of the European Union's cultural heritage and contributes to its cultural integration?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (23 June 1997)

The refocusing of the MEDIA II programme on three priority areas is the outcome of a series of consultations held by the Commission with those working in the sector, particularly in the context of the evaluation of MEDIA I and the deliberations of the European Audiovisual Conference in June 1994. Development, distribution and training were identified as priority areas for support since it was in these fields that some leverage could be gained on the market structures. Furthermore, the programme needed to be rationalised and more strictly targeted so as avoid the kind of scatter effect for which MEDIA I had been criticised.

The new slant given to the programme in no way affects the Commission's policy of support for 'small film-makers'. On the contrary, positive discrimination is systematically applied in the management of the calls for proposals published by the Commission.

More precisely, special attention is paid to countries with a low audiovisual production capacity and a limited geographic or linguistic area, in accordance with the two decisions adopted by the Council.

As regards aid for development, an average of 25% of projects come from countries with a low audiovisual production capacity while 30% of the overall 'development' budget is awarded to the projects selected.

As regards aid for training, it should be stressed that the origin or location of projects is no measure of the participation of regions or countries in these projects. In fact, the networks are composed of partners from all the Member States. For example, the 32 projects selected in 1997 involved 63 partners from countries with a low audiovisual capacity.

Furthermore, priority is given to countries with a low audiovisual capacity not only in the selection of projects but also in the selection of participants and trainees for the projects.

As regards aid for distribution, when all calls for proposals are taken together, 50% of projects come from countries with a low audiovisual capacity and 55% receive financial contributions amounting to 34% of the overall 'distribution' budget. Support for distribution is granted in proportion to distribution costs (lower in the 'small countries'), which explains the difference between the number of projects supported and the amount of aid granted.