Agenda of the next sitting: see Minutes


Culture in a globalising world (debate)
The next item is the report by Vasco Graça Moura, on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education, on a European agenda for culture in a globalising world.
rapporteur. - (PT) Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, having proposed a general framework for cultural matters in the context of the Lisbon agenda, I decided to incorporate into my report the many proposals put forward by Members since they were in line with the general approach. Therefore, if the report contains some points that might seem redundant when set against other instruments already approved in the meantime and in force, they serve to emphasise the topics thought to be the most relevant.
Recalling the main points of that framework, I would say that the European Union has a very special duty to safeguard Europe's cultural richness. The European cultural heritage, in all its dimensions, must, by every means, be preserved and disseminated both within and outside the Union, without denying the fact that it is wholly desirable to take as open an attitude as possible to every other culture, which has, moreover, always been the hallmark of Europe.
Our cultural heritage, encompassing its diverse forms of expression and the combination of its founding sources, such as, Graeco-Latin and Judaeo-Christian antiquity, has, over the course of history, placed Europe in the vanguard of all the continents. It has proved to be an unrivalled driver of innovation, development and progress, which has spread in every direction, and today still constitutes an essential reference point for humanism, spiritual enrichment and enlivenment, democracy, tolerance, and citizenship.
In an increasingly globalised world, the outstanding specific qualities contained within the nucleus of Europe's cultural richness constitute genuine European added value and their identity-giving role is vital for Europe and the Union in that it helps them to understand the world, bring about cohesion, emphasise their uniqueness, and assert themselves in relation to other peoples.
The particular ways in which the influence of European cultural heritage has over the course of history found expression in other continents must lead to special measures emphasising those factors which serve to build civilisation, mutual understanding and a constructive approach uniting the peoples represented. We recommend the Council and the Commission should enhance the prestige of Europe's classical heritage and the historic contributions of national cultures in all their dimensions down through the centuries, while also allowing for the needs of the culture sector in the future.
We therefore suggest that the year 2011 be considered 'European Year of the Greek and Latin Classics' in order to make the peoples of the Union and the rest of the world more aware of this essential aspect of cultural heritage now in danger of being forgotten. For the same reason we stress the need to develop the promotion of European languages in the world and their role in creative artistic activity in other continents, so as to facilitate both mutual knowledge and understanding and the cultural interaction generated and conveyed by those languages in their extra-European dimensions.
On the other hand, the existing Community programmes in the culture sector do not fully reflect the implications of Europeans' common cultural heritage, which is why we need specific programmes in order to foster creativity and preserve the links, on a wider scale and at a deeper seated level, with the goods and values, both tangible and intangible, that constitute European cultural heritage and to enable those goods and values to interact according to the humanist conception of identities and differences and in present-day cultural works.
The programmes in the cultural sector will all do a great deal to foster cohesion, real convergence, economic growth, sustainable development, innovation, employment and competitiveness, but we should not forget that culture and cultural products have value in themselves (culture qua culture). We would remind the Council that the intended budgetary funding for the measures proposed in the Commission communication and those already in existence need to be reviewed immediately and as a matter of urgency. Finally, since there is no time to mention any more points, I welcome the Commission's communication and its approval by the Council. We agree with the objectives set.
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, I would like to thank Mr Graça Moura for his commitment, the Committee itself and all relevant contributors to this report. I believe that it confirms that culture deserves a more central place in our discussions, and in our days and years of cooperation. I think it is confirmation that we have moved from an original agenda dominated by hard material - coal and steel - to intangibles like culture, education, creativity and citizenship. We cannot measure it in kilos or tonnes but it is about the future of our unity, of our communities at local, regional and national, as well as European, level.
I think that is why we put forward the proposal. Since last year it has received a great deal of concrete attention and support in the public domain in the Member States as well as in the Council. I am happy to see it because this was the most important answer: we want to work more through culture, for culture and also for the world of cultures or culture in the world. I am happy to see your support for this agenda, which is also very important. It has always been very clear to me as Commissioner, and also to the Commission, that the Parliament seeks to do more in these areas.
Of course we need to adopt a common approach. This is the way to implement this agenda. The three basic areas are important, and were also mentioned in the previous report: creative industries; cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue; and, equally important, the external dimension - external cooperation in culture and culture in the Union's external policy.
I agree with you that we should not give too much weight to the economic importance of culture, but we really need to get the right balance in our cultural policies. Your report rightly recognises the importance of giving culture a larger role in international relations. We consider that this is an opportunity to build a proactive and constructive agenda on cultural diversity in Community policies. I know I can count on your collaboration in this matter.
On the issue of mobility, we support the need for transnational mobility of cultural players as a major tool for building a European cultural area. Look, for example, at Erasmus in education. After a decade - now two decades - we have a European higher education area, the most popular programme and a lot of modernisation and openness at our universities. I think this quest for mobility, knowledge, respect and acceptance should also be developed in the area of arts and culture. I believe we can achieve a great deal now by starting the pilot project on mobility that you in the Parliament proposed last year.
Last, but not least, it is important, as I said, to adopt a common approach. I am happy that Member States endorsed open methods of coordination. In November last year two expert working groups with representatives of Member States were set up with the aim of enhancing mobility of artists and culture professionals, as well as maximising the potential of the cultural and creative industries. You will be duly informed of the results of the work within these groups. As you know, we set up the cultural forum and the first was organised under the Portuguese Presidency, for which I am grateful. We also suggest that the cultural and creative sector at large should set up a platform on the cultural and creative industries and one on the access to culture, along the lines of the existing platform on intercultural dialogue.
I think that there is a growing volume of potential contribution and I am happy to work with my colleagues in the Commission, as well as here with you in Parliament, to reinforce the mainstreaming of culture in many other EU policies. I am, of course, looking forward, not only to the debate, but especially to the implementation of this agenda.
draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Regional Development. - (PL) Madam President, I would like to offer my sincere congratulations to Mr Graça Moura on a good report that, in a coherent and specific manner, presents the priorities in the sphere of culture and defines the long-term aims. The report shows the importance of culture for the development of the European Union and for enhancing the potential for innovation and increased competitiveness. Culture is a sector that creates jobs and gives a genuine boost to economic growth. On behalf of the Committee on Regional Development, I would like to draw your attention to the significance of the regions of the European Union as an important forum for cultural cooperation. Culture and language stimulate the development of regions and are a magnet for investment, especially in poorly developed regions with meagre natural resources and few tourist and leisure attractions. This is why local and regional authorities have such an important part to play in generally supporting and nurturing culture in the areas under their control. There is just one item in the report about which I have reservations - and here I am speaking on behalf of the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, so that I do not have to repeat myself in a moment - and that is what we find under Recital K, which suggests that we demand that immigrants and tourists subordinate themselves to European tradition and heritage. This is not a good piece of phrasing. During the Committee's work, the members of the ALDE Group voted against this.
In the Year of Intercultural Dialogue it is worth pointing out that the European Union should, in putting into practice the values of intercultural dialogue, be open to other cultures. It should promote and create common ground for cooperation by putting forward interesting programmes. It is therefore not a good thing that the potential for European third countries to take part in the exceptionally engaging and prestigious European Capital of Culture programme after 2010 has been scrapped.
Madam President, I was supposed to be making a further speech in just a moment, so I would like to request another 10 seconds this time round, if I may, and then I shall not get up a second time.
I believe that it is first and foremost those countries covered by the European Neighbourhood Policy that should have the possibility of taking part in this programme. I keenly support the demand made in the report for 2010 to be declared as the European Year of Fryderyk Chopin, given that it is the 200th anniversary of the birth of this composer of genius, who made an incontrovertible contribution to European and world culture.
on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (DE) Madam President, first of all, I should like to thank Mr Graça Moura most sincerely on behalf of my group, the Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, for his excellent report. Thank you, too, to the Commission for presenting this communication on the European agenda for culture. It can count on Parliament's support for culture as a horizontal task, for increasing artists' mobility, for increasing regional cooperation and for strengthening international cooperation.
However, we also note the absence of something on this agenda. This is a subject we discussed in detail a little while ago. The cultural industries and their growing significance also mean that the economic aspects are becoming considerably stronger than has been the case in the past. The agenda for culture is not only about issues of better cooperation on the cultural agenda or of increased funding, but also of the legal framework. In that regard, it is indeed true even within the European Union that, if culture is in competition with internal market law or competition law, it always draws the short straw in case of doubt.
You will all remember the Lévai report: the Commissioner for the Internal Market and Services described collective management societies for online music as obstacles to competition on the internal market. Here culture clearly draws the shorter straw and is in a weaker position than European internal market law. Hence the urgent need, and tomorrow Parliament will decide the same way as the Committee on Culture and Education. The Unesco Convention must be applied not only to securing cultural diversity with regard to third countries, but also as a matter of the utmost urgency in our own European law.
Our heartfelt plea to the Commissioner, therefore, is that we have just one time slot, and therefore need a proposal quickly for strengthening cultural diversity in European internal market law.
on behalf of the PSE. - (ET) Colleagues, our colleague Vasco Graça Moura has carried out some excellent work in compiling a report which refers both to cultural heritage and future needs, to common principles and specific initiatives. As shadow rapporteur, I express my thanks.
I would like to focus on just a couple of points. As of the beginning of 2009 our circumstances will have changed: the Lisbon Treaty will have entered into force. In order for our diplomatic representatives to be able to represent our cultures properly, the cultural dimension should be consistently incorporated into our external policy. Currently we are a long way from achieving that. Initially we are talking of incorporating a cultural dimension only into development activities although this in itself poses difficulties for us. There are many very valuable elements in European culture, but instead of enjoying the aggregate of those elements we seem to achieve only an arithmetical average. European culture has, unfortunately, only a small presence worldwide.
I venture to believe that the world's finest film-makers and writers live in Europe, yet the world's cinemas are dominated by Hollywood and the bookshops are full of entertainment in paperback form from America. Why do we translate mass foreign products, and why do we not translate each other's best authors? Why do third countries aided by us prefer to spend money on American cultural products? This situation is in need of change.
We must without doubt place greater focus on re-establishing a common European cultural space. A cultural space which includes the countries of the Mediterranean and Central Europe as well as the Nordic, Baltic and East European countries. We will be stronger as a result, and will achieve an aggregate incorporating all the valuable elements, an aggregate which is greater than the sum of its parts.
on behalf of the UEN Group. - (PL) Madam President, this is a very valuable and thoroughly prepared document. I congratulate Mr Graça Moura.
The draft resolution draws attention to the need for a specific approach to the problems of culture at a time of globalisation. Regardless of our openness to the heritage of other cultures, it is exceptionally important to protect, disseminate and promote European culture. It is important to remember the roots of our culture, and especially the role of the Greek and Latin classics; however, we should also look at those areas of culture that cross borders without hindrance and without the need for translation. I have in mind music and painting.
In 2010 it will be 200 years since the birth of Fryderyk Chopin - a composer of genius who is known throughout the world. Emphasising the significance of this event will make it easier to perceive the part played by all the outstanding European musicians - Mozart, Liszt, Handel, Haydn, Schumann, Verdi, Grieg, Berlioz, Paganini and many others - in the creation of European civilisation and in its contribution to world culture.
The report also draws attention to current problems faced by artists in such matters as crossing frontiers, as well as the impact of their mobility on artistic development, and emphasises the role of art in economic development.
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. - (DE) Madam President, the interesting thing in this paper on a European agenda for culture in a globalising world is that it really asserts the strategic claim not only to organise cultural policy as a sector, but that culture should be an integral part of various European policy fields, such as foreign policy, urban development policy and Structural Funds policy. This really is a new quality. It changes the European Union's self-image regarding the importance of culture and its strategic importance to policy as a whole.
Culture is always a double-edged sword, and this is what is particularly interesting. It is always a product, but it is more than a product because it carries meaning and purpose. This evening I should like once again to put it in graphic terms: I am anticipating that this dual nature of culture will really have an effect in all policy fields, particularly regarding internal-market logic. Besides, Commissioner Figeľ will be very strong if he is successful in imparting the strategic importance of culture to the other Commissioners.
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. - (CS) A globalised world implies global culture. This, however, is a term that can be interpreted in many ways. Across the European Union a global culture can be the essence of the best that individual European cultures represent. It can also be a post-modern universal culture that gradually overrides and forces out original European diversity. Personally, I favour the former scenario. I want the European Union to promote cultural diversity that enriches nations and lets them learn from each other. A globalised world globalises our lifestyles and ways of working. Multinational companies have turned our cities into a common marketplace so that sometimes we do not know whether we are in Paris or in Prague. As far as I am concerned, we have now had quite enough.
Culture has a place in the soul of a nation and roots in its place of origin. Culture can be communicated and is capable of both absorbing and eliminating. It is also vulnerable, however, if it becomes a mere commodity or makes concessions to popular tastes in order to be 'accessible to all'. Culture should indeed be accessible to all but it should promote high values instead of pandering, set higher targets instead of reflecting our low demands, because the general public does not need a great deal to satisfy it. I would like to thank the rapporteur for emphasising in his report the importance of preserving the cultural heritage of all European nations.
(HU) Madam President, I warmly welcome this worthwhile report by Mr Graça Moura. In this European Year of Intercultural Dialogue, we must emphasise the special significance of culture in reinforcing European identity.
As an ethnic Hungarian from Romania, I would like to draw Member States' attention to supporting Europe's minority and endangered cultures. Examples of these include the ancient cultures of the ethnic Hungarians living in Romania, the Moldavian Csangos, the Szekler people of Transylvania, as well as those of the Macedonians in Greece and Bulgaria, the ethnic Serbs in Romania and the Basque people in Spain. The recommendation adopted by the Council of Europe on the basis of a report on the Csango people by the Finnish MP Tytti Isohookana-Asunmaa is a concept that could be emulated, as its objective is to preserve the Csango culture, which is on the point of extinction.
In the context of the European Union's foreign relations, we must also pay heed to Tibet, under occupation by the Chinese Communist dictatorship and where, as the Dalai Lama has put it, cultural genocide has been unleashed on one of the world's most ancient cultures. Thank you.
(FR) Madam President, first I would like to congratulate Mr Graça Moura for the quality of his report, which in every point reflects his knowledge and high level of expertise on the subject.
This report reaffirms culture's place in the construction of Europe and the need to protect it and to promote diversity. He underlines the essential role it plays in meeting the Lisbon targets and in the EU's external relations. He quite rightly calls for the strengthening of actions in areas such as literary translation, the promotion of European languages, the teaching of art and the cultural industries, but also in the protection and promotion of our heritage. In this regard, we need to promote existing cultural programmes and support new initiatives such as the creation of a European heritage label, which will help to develop a common identity while encouraging cultural tourism.
This report also highlights the opportunities offered by digital technologies in terms of access to and the promotion and spread of culture, while emphasising the need to protect intellectual property rights. In this context, it is right to support the setting up of specific projects such as the European digital library, the purpose of which is to digitalise our heritage and access to it, and preserve it for future generations.
(DE) Madam President, thank you to the rapporteur and also to the Commission for this document. Once again the central role of culture in European integration and in the worldwide image of the European Union is being highlighted. How we choose to deal with this recognition, which is not new but is extremely important, and integrate it into every area of policy - as is already specified in Article 151 - has been well defined in the present agenda for culture.
It is pleasing that, during the preparatory work, a wide consultation process took place with various cultural stakeholders who do essential cultural work, for which we must thank them. We urgently need this cultural strategy in order, for example, not only to be continually referring to our cultural diversity with pride, but also to be able to cope with the challenge of dealing with this diversity and the problems that arise.
Implementation of the strategy will be crucial, however. President Barroso announced a task force for culture back in November 2005 in Budapest, which could be an important signal to the outside world, but has not so far been implemented. I hope this will not be the case with this agenda for culture. Promoting culture is a return on investment in the areas of intercultural dialogue, of implementation of the Lisbon Strategy and of internal relations, and it is also above all a social value added.
We use art and culture. It offers us great benefit in almost every social and economic field. It should not be exploited, taken advantage of or starved out, however, and we should also therefore be thinking of an appropriate budget.
(RO) I congratulate the Rapporteur, my colleague Vasco Graça Moura, for the way in which he knew how to manage the rather large number of amendments to this report.
Personally, I was glad when the Committee on Culture and Education of the Parliament approved, with a large majority of votes, my amendment regarding the study of the European Union history in all Member States.
The European Union construction should be studied so that young people would know the stages of the European Union's establishment and development.
I believe that, in order to know the culture of a country, each of us should know the history of the given country.
Creating a parallel with the European Union, in order to know and understand European culture in a globalized world, we should learn the history of European construction, especially since, as of 2009, the new Treaty of the European Union will become effective, we will all be European citizens and each citizen has the obligation to know his/her history.
My initiative aims at preventing future situations in which young people learn parallel histories, which have no ground in reality. Since the European Parliament has just celebrated half a century of existence, I believe it deserves to have a history that promotes cultural identity and European culture in the context of globalization.
(DE) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I particularly welcome this report because it shows that this Europe is growing together and that culture plays a very special role in this. If we think of the Capitals of Culture alone - next year it will be the city of Linz in Upper Austria - these give many creative artists the opportunity to get to know another new part of Europe. Later on there will also be a lot of visitors travelling from Linz to the other Capitals of Culture.
This programme contributes a great deal to mutual understanding. In the case of Vilnius, in particular, we have a very good opportunity to show how strong cooperation can actually be. This should also be an example for the future.
Madam President, the point I want to make concerns equal access to culture no matter what your background; rich or poor, culture has to be accessible to all.
Free entry to museums and art galleries - certainly in Scotland and the United Kingdom - has seen record levels of people visiting cultural institutions. That is why free access to cultural institutions and cultural events is so important across the European Union.
Many of the points in this report - paragraphs 10, 25, 26, and 46 about 2011 being the 'European Year of the Greek and Latin Classics' - are very interesting. The decline in the teaching of classics in state schools in my country of Scotland is deeply depressing. How can we understand the present without understanding the past? I am grateful for the report.
(CS) The European Union has a duty to safeguard Europe's cultural wealth because our cultural heritage must be preserved, disseminated and shared both within and outside the Union. If this plan is to be implemented, it must receive political and financial support. The Community's existing cultural programmes do not fully reflect the scope of our common European cultural heritage. I support the calls to the Commission to propose specific programmes to promote both artistic creativity and the tangible and intangible goods and values that constitute European cultural heritage. This cultural heritage should be managed in a sustainable manner. The support of public/private partnerships is vital to achieve this goal. The proposal to establish a European arts sponsorship scheme may be a step in the right direction.
(RO) It is more than suitable to discuss, in the Year of Intercultural Dialogue, a true European agenda for culture, which is to be promoted both inside the European Union and internationally.
Therefore, I welcome the drafting of this report, which correctly emphasizes the importance of this field and the need to mobilize its potential fully. Culture is the basis of promoting the values of peace, democracy and tolerance, as well as a highly-performant economic growth that could deal with the challenges of globalization in the 21st century.
From the report's multitude of recommendations, I would like to reiterate two aspects. First of all, at an internal level, it is essential for the local and regional actors to get involved in promoting culture, as factors of economic development and Lisbon Strategy implementation, as well as of consolidating cultural heritage and promoting cohesion in contemporary society. Second, it is in the European Union's best interests to promote culture and intercultural dialogue at an adequate level in its foreign policy.
In this field, the countries included into the Neighbourhood Policy should be the main beneficiaries of these actions.
Member of the Commission. - (SK) Thank you for the debate and in particular for the positive, constructive atmosphere. This is a testimony to the belief in the importance of culture and the current agenda. I want to assure you (although I am one of the new arrivals from the enlargement) that never before in the Union has culture been as prominent and as central as it is today. Of course, this is not only about the formal agenda: it is about a process, progress and implementation.
In recent years several things were achieved for the first time in history: the European Commission's role as a representative of the Community as well as common representation of Europe's 25 or 27 Member States in UNESCO are the results of a certain cultural maturity.
A few months ago the Member States agreed to introduce an open method of coordination although many people did not expect them to do so. We have a permanent forum for culture, 2008 is the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue and there is a consensus on making 2009 the European Year of Creativity and Innovation: all this represents enormous progress.
On the other hand, culture has of course a dual nature. It has an economic dimension but it is also a vehicle for conveying meaning and substance. That is why culture is specific and lacks exclusivity in European law. That is also why in individual cases or disputes we want European law to apply but at the same time we want the specific nature of culture to be taken into account: the need to maintain and strengthen the culture diversity that is our heritage, our distinguishing feature.
Before I finish, let me say that I agree that more investment is needed. The Commission proposed a budget of EUR 500 million for the Culture Programme but only EUR 400 million was approved. In the future it may be possible to support cultural aspects under other programmes as well. When we were summing up the contributions of the Structural Funds to individual structural operations in the 27 Member States, I was very pleased to find out that for the period 2007-2013 approximately EUR 5 billion have been allocated to culture as a whole, across the entire Union, from the Structural Funds. If we act responsibly, we can combine our individual potential, resources and policies. This, I assure you, is also my responsibility and I would like to invite you to cooperate and help to implement this agenda. Finally, I would like to thank Mr Vasco Graça Moura once again.
rapporteur. - (PT) Madam President, after so many good contributions I am sorry to have to reply briefly just to some of the points that I consider essential, but I think they all, like the many points in the report not mentioned here, bring extraordinary enrichment to this debate.
First I should like to stress the new policy to introduce culture in the terms set out in the Commission's communication. That was mentioned by Mrs Trüpel and it is a question of ensuring that the cultural aspect is included in other European policies. I think that is fundamental. The second point was raised by Mrs Mikko, and concerns the cultural dimension that should be incorporated in Europe's external policy, not merely European Union culture but the culture of the Member States - it is absolutely essential. Thirdly, as Mrs Hieronymi mentioned, there is a fine balance between economic aspects and the economic utility of culture and culture as a value in its own right (culture qua culture).
Just two more points, Mrs Staniszewska mentioned the importance of cultural action at regional and local level that is also emphasised in the report, but I think needs to be underscored. I am in complete agreement with that. Finally, I must also stress that giving families and students access to culture via schools and society, as well as building bridges between cultural heritage and the exact sciences, innovation and technology, are fundamental aspects of those concerns.
Madam President, since it is impossible to go into any further aspects, I should merely like to conclude by saying that culture is an inalienable and indispensable system of individual collective values and experiences and that it is with those collective and individual values and experiences in mind that Europe should approach the future.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Thursday, 10 April 2008.
Written statements (Rule 142)
in writing. - I wish to use this opportunity to outline some major issues presented in the Graça Moura report on the 'European agenda for culture in a globalising world'. First, the social situation of artists: I agree with the fact that we should work out an appropriate legal framework in the areas of tax, labour and social security for artists and performers. We should also focus more on the preservation of cultural heritage.
The Culture Programme is good, but is not enough, and I support the idea that we should have other programmes alongside it, more focused on the preservation and promotion of European cultural heritage. Last but not least, I wish to emphasize the need for an effective partnership between the public and the private sector. In order to overcome the present challenges, culture should be partially funded by the private sector. Therefore, a European arts sponsorship scheme should be created as soon as possible.
in writing. - (HU) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I welcome the efforts of the Commission in proposing an agenda for culture enabling a European strategy to be pursued both within the European Union and in the EU's relations with third countries. In this Year of Intercultural Dialogue, it is important to devote special attention to promoting diversity and intercultural dialogue, as culture is a key dimension of the Lisbon Strategy and we will not achieve the fundamental Lisbon goals unless we treat it as such.
I was disappointed to see that the report pays scant attention to relations among cultures, minorities, national or ethnic groups, or among the countries they live in. We cannot ignore the fact that the arts have a prominent role to play in the integration of minorities, but they can also provide social support for talented but impoverished artists. By supporting the arts and artists, we can provide prospects for poor ethnic groups that are transnational in character, such as the Roma people, who have preserved their centuries-old cultural tradition to the present day.
Furthermore, we must ensure that regulations governing commercial (Internet) relations are open and transparent to ensure fair market access, thereby allowing European cultural industries to develop all their potential, particularly in the audiovisual and musical sectors. Alongside adequate consumer protection, we must eradicate the root causes of counterfeiting and piracy, and protect Europe's cultural diversity by means of sound and fair regulation of competition based on achievement.


2. Human Rights violations in China, notably the case of Liu Xiaobo
The next item is the debate on seven motions for resolution concerning violations of human rights in China, notably the case of Liu Xiaobo.
author. - Mr President, last month, Mr Liu Xiaobo, the very well-known writer and political activist, was sentenced to 11 years' imprisonment for 'incitement to subvert state power'. He was arrested over a year ago after drafting Charter 08, a charter which was signed by more than 10 000 ordinary Chinese citizens, demanding the most normal things in a democratic society: the right to free speech, open elections and rule of law.
The prosecution of Mr Liu Xiaobo, based solely on his peaceful initiatives, and the judicial harassment he faced are undoubtedly incompatible with internationally acknowledged norms of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Therefore, we should call strongly for Mr Liu Xiaobo's unconditional release, which should take place immediately.
In the last few years, relations between the European Union and China have focused mainly on the economic dimension, which has overshadowed the country's democratic record and the gross human rights violations which have systematically occurred in China.
A few days ago, for the first time, a police official admitted that the famous human rights lawyer and 2008 Nobel Peace Prize nominee, Mr Gao Zhisheng, had gone missing after a year in the Chinese authorities' custody. Many people fear that he might be dead. A few weeks ago, the Chinese Government disregarded an EU appeal not to execute a British citizen.
It is particularly disturbing to see how the Chinese Government ignores its international commitments in the field of human rights. One is entitled to wonder why, under these circumstances, China submitted its candidacy to the UN Human Rights Council - was it simply to legitimise the way it suppresses human rights?
In April 2009, the Chinese Government issued a national human rights plan, a lengthy document which appears to be nothing but a piece of paper. There must be no doubt. This House, the European Parliament, has the obligation to thoroughly evaluate the results of the EU-China human rights dialogue.
author. - Mr President, China has demonstrated impressive economic progress. However, part of this progress has been achieved by the use of methods that are in flagrant conflict with universally accepted human norms. Hopes that events like the Olympic Games would motivate the Chinese authorities to show more respect for democratic norms have proven to be in vain. On the contrary, acts of repression have increased and we need to draw conclusions from this fact.
Today, the European Parliament voices concern over the fate of the prominent human rights activist and scholar, Liu Xiaobo, signatory of Charter 08, which urges constitutional reform and the safeguarding of human rights. This Charter has been bravely co-signed by more than 10 000 Chinese citizens. Last month, Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years' imprisonment. We ask today for his immediate and unconditional release. We express our solidarity with the peaceful actions of Chinese citizens in favour of democratic reforms and the safeguarding of human rights, to which the Chinese Government has committed itself.
Mr President, urgent resolutions are always a difficult exercise because more often than not, they reflect political impotence rather than a humanitarian emergency. The naming and shaming strategy that we apply every month is a last resort. It clearly means that all the other means of dialogue or of exerting pressure have proved ineffective and that, finding ourselves powerless to act, we condemn.
In the case of China, I am not sure that increasing the number of urgent resolutions as we have been doing - in March 2009, in November 2009, in January 2010, and in March 2010, with the other planned resolution - is productive. This is not because I underestimate the difficulty that China is having in managing its transition towards democracy; it is because I believe that, in constantly being on the offensive, it is not the target that is wrong but the strategy. There are other more convincing political tools.
I was the first person to request resolutions on the Uighurs and to harbour the sadly vain hope that capital punishments would in this way be avoided. On behalf of our group, I would like to give my support to Liu Xiaobo, the recently convicted Tiananmen dissident, whose only crime is his passion for democracy. However, I refuse to pillory China every two months, quite simply because that will not make it give in. Quite the contrary, in fact, because this key trade partner, this country which has a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, which is seeing intensive growth and is in the midst of democratic change, which we need in order to combat climate change, this country must be a partner to which one tells a few home truths but which one respects for the efforts that it undertakes. It is this respect that is missing in the resolution.
It is for these political reasons that my group has withdrawn its signature. However, to ensure that there is no ambiguity on the issue of human rights, which I value at least as much as you do, my group will vote in favour of all the amendments that relate to it. As regards the final outcome of the vote, that will depend on the amendments that we have tabled.
Mr President, China is a large country with a rich history and with huge development potential. The hosting of the Olympic Games in Beijing last year did not have the results that some had expected.
The relationship that the European Union is able to maintain with China is of particular importance. It is our duty as MEPs to say loudly and clearly what we consider important and what is unacceptable.
The fact is, the human rights situation in China is unacceptable. The case of Mr Liu Xiaobo, found guilty of demanding democratic reforms in his country, along with more than 10 000 of his fellow citizens, exemplifies this. Dare I say that, in my opinion, making such mobilisation possible in that country is an achievement rather than a crime?
We must demand the release of Mr Xiaobo, and of all the men and women who, like him, are being harassed and imprisoned for having committed just one crime, that of defending human rights, and more specifically, one of the most fundamental of those rights, namely freedom of expression.
As one of my fellow Members said, just recently a British citizen was actually executed, despite the fact that he was mentally ill. This is the first time in more than 50 years that a European has been executed in China. Indeed, freedom of expression is being flouted a little more each day, as recently revealed to us by Google, which nonetheless has a reputation for being the operator that provides if not the best protection, then at least the least worst protection for Internet users.
It is common knowledge that, to establish themselves in China, operators must comply with the Chinese authorities' request to install software filters, which even Google has ended up agreeing to do. We cannot accept a government engaging in Internet piracy and denying Internet users their freedom of expression.
The European institutions must join forces and take action on this matter. Chinese Internet users must be able to access uncensored information. The European Union has a duty to support Internet businesses that refuse to help the Chinese authorities to censor the Internet or, worse still, to arrest human rights defenders, democrats, or even journalists, as was the case with Mr Xiaobo in April 2005.
Finally, ladies and gentlemen, I cannot end my speech without asking you to remember the deaths in Tiananmen Square; many hundreds of young Chinese people met their deaths on the night of 3 June 1989. It was 20 years ago now, a sad anniversary which we would be honoured to commemorate by paying tribute to those young victims. Not all the events of 1989 have deserved the same attention, however.
author. - Mr President, the fact that yet again in this House, we are debating human rights abuses in China indicates that the Communist authoritarian leadership of Beijing remains determined to suppress any political dissent.
However, that fact should not stop us from raising these issues in Parliament. I believe not only that we have a duty to do so, but that we owe it to the victims of human rights abuses in China such as Liu Xiaobo, most of whom have been denied a voice. This is why we are debating this matter again today.
Indeed, the award of the Sakharov Prize in 2008 to Hu Jia showed the world how seriously we MEPs take the issue of human rights in China. We take it seriously because China really matters. Its vast size and global outreach, its military muscle and economic power compel the EU to seek a strategic partnership based on mutual respect and security.
Perhaps eventually our relationship with China will also be based on our common values of democracy, human rights and the rule of law: we can but hope. I think all of us hope, nevertheless, to see the day when we will really see this in practice in the People's Republic of China. It has been suggested that such ideals are somehow alien to Asia. I always look to democratic Taiwan and vast India with its democratic secular traditions, where these flourish in a free society, to basically put a lie to the idea that the PRC cannot be democratic.
author. - (FI) Mr President, what is significant about the Liu Xiaobo case is that now as many as 10 000 people have openly expressed their support for him, and I think that the European Parliament should acknowledge the bravery of these people and praise them for it.
At the same time, we have to remind ourselves that China itself has given promises to improve the human rights situation. China tried to join the Human Rights Council saying that it would be committed to the promotion and protection of human rights and would uphold the highest standards in this area. Thus, these are China's own promises before the United Nations and it is to these that we ought to refer.
This resolution also speaks of human rights dialogues between the EU and China, and however optimistic we would like to be, the end result is that they have hardly been of any benefit. The institutions of the European Union also need between them to think about how they can improve their own strategies and make China understand that its commitments in matters relating to human rights are our business too and that the future of cooperation between us depends crucially on them.
Finally, we might ask why the European Union's policy on China is so incoherent and inconsistent, and what we can do about it. The European Parliament, for its part, will certainly support the Commission in a combined effort to establish a new strategy with China.
'We should end the practice of viewing words as crimes'. This is what Liu Xiaobo asserted in Charter 08, the political manifesto which he launched and which was supported, as has already been said, by thousands of Chinese people. Liu Xiaobo has been sentenced to 11 years in prison and will be deprived of his political rights for a further two years for making such a statement and for continually supporting human rights. I believe that this punishment is symptomatic of the Chinese authorities stepping up their campaign against human rights activists. Further proof of this is highlighted by the announcement this Sunday that Tzu Yong Jun, a leader of the Tiananmen Square movement, was also sentenced to nine years in prison.
As a result, I believe that it is vital to raise the subject of human rights as part of the next European Union-China Summit, as specified in Article 9 of the resolution.
I believe, as also suggested by Mrs Hautala earlier, that dialogue is not sufficient for human rights. This human rights issue needs to be dealt with as part of summit meetings because dialogue has not yielded any results so far.
on behalf of the S&D Group. - Mr President, the European Union is now negotiating a new framework agreement with China, which will set a further path for the development of economic relations with the country.
Those relations are very tight, but we must not close our eyes before repeated human rights violations and with respect for the rule of law.
The European Union must strengthen the EU-China human rights dialogue. This dialogue, established in 2000, proved to be inefficient. The EU, and especially the High Representative, should ensure coordinated and effective EU common foreign policy towards China. Respect for human rights must serve as a basis for this policy.
Mr President, when China was selected to host the Olympic Games, I initially hoped, after all China's promises to improve the human rights situation, that this would perhaps actually happen.
However, during and after the Olympic Games, we, unfortunately, had to admit that there was no improvement, but rather a worsening of the human rights situation. Now, following the judgment against Liu Xiaobo, we have even seen a homosexual party banned by the police, which clearly threatens to result in a political ice age in China for dissidents, human rights defenders and homosexuals.
For this reason, we demand the immediate release of Liu Xiaobo and other human rights defenders and we call on China in particular - if it wishes to be a recognised partner in the international community - to put an end to its hysterical censorship measures and monitoring methods.
This, of course, applies in particular to the Internet. We cannot accept political filtering of the Internet. It is an essential element of fundamental rights that the freedom of expression must be defended in all nations of the world. Human rights are universal and indivisible, whether here in Europe, in the US, in Sudan or in China. The People's Republic of China will have to get used to that if it really wants a different role.
I am firmly convinced that we, as Europeans, need to make it clear to China within the framework of our official relations at summits - precisely because we have an interest in cooperation in the areas of climate protection policy, environmental policy and regulation of the financial markets - that it urgently needs to change its human rights policy.
on behalf of the EFD Group. - (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, one of the most significant problems regarding human rights in China is the exploitation of forced labour in the Laogai, the Chinese concentration camps.
This issue, apart from being a true form of modern slavery, specifically concerns the European economy. It is, in fact, certain that very many goods coming out of the Chinese market are produced by detainees in the Laogai, with an obvious slashing of labour costs that leads to unfair competition with respect to European goods.
Going by the experience, also, of the United States, which has already passed certain laws prohibiting the import of Chinese goods produced in the Laogai, Europe can and should do everything possible to prevent the entry of goods produced wholly or partially by forced labour.
Firstly, a campaign should be conducted to raise public awareness about this issue; and secondly, the same hygiene and safety parameters that are required of European products should be demanded of all products imported into Europe, and legislation on labelling should be introduced to ensure the traceability of goods.
Moreover, entrepreneurs who invest in China must be asked to follow precise rules regarding workers' rights. Finally, we need to establish rules and, above all, ensure that they are respected so that there is an absolute ban on the import of goods produced by forced labour.
I am convinced that this is the only way we can genuinely help the Chinese people in their fight for human rights. If this does not happen, we will remain accomplices who wish to deny these people their freedom.
Mr President, I have the honour to be the European Parliament's Vice-President responsible for democracy and human rights. Rightly, the resolution focuses on Liu Xiaobo, the principal author of Charter 08. An English version is available on my website charter08.eu.
After my last visit to Beijing in May 2006, all the dissidents with whom I had contact were arrested, imprisoned and, in some cases, tortured; Hu Jia, for example, who is still in prison and needing medical treatment. In particular Gao Zhisheng, who reportedly has disappeared after three and a half years in prison, under house arrest and under torture, which caused him twice to try and commit suicide. Gao's open letters to the regime in 2005 set the tone for Charter 08. His investigation into the persecution of the spiritual Buddhist group, Falun Gong, led to widespread support across China. I believe the authorities should now produce Gao Zhisheng and release him.
Nobody should be in any doubt that the European Parliament will not give up on reform in China and, of course, in Tibet.
(FI) Mr President, it is intolerable that commercial interests should have drawn the longer straw in relations between the EU and China and that the insistence on respect for human rights and democratic development has been more or less put in the role of cordial greetings.
I have been following with interest the boldness showed by the search engine company, Google, and its plans to end cooperation with the Chinese authorities with regard to the filtering of Internet web pages and censorship, and even to leave the country. At the same time, Google is visibly calling for freedom of speech for Chinese Internet users.
I share the concern of my fellow Members regarding the treatment of Liu Xiaobo and other Chinese prisoners of conscience, and I hope that the Council and Commission will take up Xiaobo's case at the next summit meeting between the EU and China. The agreements being negotiated right now should make it quite clear that the future development of commercial relations with China will be tied more effectively to political dialogue and a respect for human rights.
(DE) Mr President, we have talked about various different things as regards what would be the right way to go about talking to China and putting it under pressure, because clearly, very little makes much of an impression on this country. Mrs De Keyser said that, for this reason, her group had withdrawn its signature. I do not think that that is the right way forwards. As the EU, which has enshrined human rights in the Charter of Fundamental Rights and in the Treaty of Lisbon, we of all people should keep on pointing out violations of fundamental human rights. There are no other options available to us at the moment. When we think of something better, I will be there straight away to give it my support.
However, it is not only about Liu Xiaobo; it is also about Gao Zhisheng, who has disappeared and, from what we now hear, has allegedly committed suicide. Everyone assumes that he has probably been killed in one terrible way or another. That is not acceptable. In connection with the Olympic Games, we discovered that if we go to China and make contact there, absolutely nothing changes with regard to the human rights situation. We all hoped that it would, but it did not work. Therefore, we should not let up with our urgent appeals.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, the EU has clearly expressed its deep concern at the disproportionate sentence against the prominent human rights defender Liu Xiaobo of 11 years' imprisonment for his role as the author of Charter 08, a blueprint for democratic and rights-based reform in China, and for publishing a number of essays relating to human rights issues on the Internet.
We attach great importance to freedom of thought and expression: cornerstones, as we are all aware, of our democratic system. The verdict against Mr Liu is entirely incompatible with the right to freedom of expression enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which China is a signatory. We are also attached, by the way, to the protection of the right to sexual expression and orientation, as mentioned by Mrs Trüpel.
The EU attempted to observe the trial, and we deeply regret that our observers were barred from the courtroom. The details of the trial, which we have nevertheless been able to learn, indicate clearly that Mr Liu was not afforded the opportunity to present a proper defence and that he did not receive a fair trial. The EU will continue to call on the Chinese Government to unconditionally release Mr Liu and to end the harassment and detention of other signatories of Charter 2008.
Our overall policy towards China is one of constructive engagement in the framework of our strategic partnership. On several occasions in the past, we have welcomed China's progress with regard to social and economic rights, as well as the recent launch of China's human rights action plan, but, on the other hand, there are extremely serious concerns with regard to civil and political rights and a number of recent developments, such as those that the honourable Members of this House have raised in the draft resolution.
The EU's commitment to human rights is conveyed during our regular political contacts and, in particular, during our human rights dialogue with the Chinese authorities. The last session, as you are aware, was on 20 November last year in Beijing. The strength of our relationship allows us to discuss those matters frankly. Last year, at the 12th EU-China Summit in Nanjing, human rights were raised, both during the discussions and in the press conference.
Mrs Vergiat and Mrs Korhola touched upon the cyber attacks against Google. The Commission thinks that this is another worrisome development in the framework of freedom of expression in China. We are obviously monitoring the situation closely. We understand that there are ongoing consultations between the company and the Chinese authorities. We will remain vigilant in case similar attacks target EU companies.
Let me reassure this House that we will continue to raise those issues, including at the highest level, recalling the international human rights obligations of the People's Republic of China. We also recall the Chinese constitutional guarantees on freedom of expression. We all share the goal of a more open, transparent China, adhering to international standards on human rights and working together to address global challenges. To achieve this, we must continue to work on the development of our strategic partnership.
I would like to react to a question from Mrs De Keyser. Regarding the execution of the British citizen, Akmal Shaikh, the European Union has condemned his execution in the strongest possible terms. It deeply regrets the fact that China did not heed repeated calls by the European Union and one of its Member States for the death sentenced passed against Mr Shaikh to be commuted.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place at 12.00.
Written statements (Rule 149)
The right to life, the right of free expression and thought form the bedrock of European integration and our world vision. When one of our partners, in this instance, China, repeatedly violates these rights, we are obliged to respond. However, we must not do it based on the 'shame and blame' model, and accuse China and ignore the differences in culture and civilisation which separate us. This resolution relating to the violation of human rights in China, particularly in the case of Liu Xiaobo, is proof of a simplistic approach to the issues which Chinese society is facing. We certainly did not adopt our position in the face of the principle of the inviolability of human rights underlying the resolution, which we wholeheartedly subscribe to. It was, in fact, about the way in which it was conveyed. In order to achieve the results we want, we need to maintain an atmosphere devoid of conflict between ourselves and China. This is the only way in which we can contribute to China's development towards a society with a deep attachment to the importance of respect for human rights.
in writing. - 'Don't be evil' is the well-known motto of Google. There has been criticism regarding their policy in China over the years, questioning the motto. Human rights groups have accused Google of helping the Chinese Government in repressing its citizens and particularly human rights activists. Apparently, Google will be less evil in the future. Their decision to start to operate an unfiltered search engine in China deserves the warmest congratulations. By announcing the change in their China policy, Google risks profits from the biggest Internet market in the world and potentially abandons almost 400 million users. In this particular case, Google has proved that a big multinational company can really stick to its ethics policy. Having its founders still aboard directing the company, Google has every chance of reflecting its core values and beliefs in its every action in the future. And, if Google continues to prosper, it will prove that there is no inherent conflict between making money and acting in a sustainable and humane way.
There have been recurring violations of human rights in China, and we cannot omit to condemn them. The fact that the EU is one of China's main economic partners increases our responsibility to condemn all actions that violate the rights of any citizen, especially those who defend freedom of expression and human rights in this country. It is crucial that the People's Republic of China respects and honours the commitments it made before the Human Rights Council.
The larger a country is geographically, and the more independent it is economically, the more difficult it is to demand the observance of human rights by this country. I find it unacceptable that in its relations with China, the European Union keeps putting economic interests first. At almost every meeting at higher diplomatic levels, all we are able to do is to give a shy reminder of the issue of violations of human rights in this country. In Europe, unfortunately, we have had plenty of negative experiences with the practices of Communist regimes with respect to suppression of human rights. I am therefore convinced that the real number of violations of human rights is much higher than our information leads us to believe. For this reason, there is an urgent need for us to be able to make China respect human rights even at the cost of economic and political sacrifice. Otherwise, the developments in China may have an unfavourable impact on the overall developments in the political situation in Asia with subsequent impacts on the overall global economy and politics.
I voted in favour of the resolution condemning violations of human rights, because we must not tolerate or consent to their being broken, either as people or as citizens. Conduct which is harmful to people, their freedom and rights, which were defined many years ago, is contrary to the foundations on which Western democracies are built. The dialogue which was begun between the European Union and China in 2000 has not brought the expected effects. We should, therefore, ask ourselves if we have done everything we could have done, and if the answer is 'no', we should apply the provisions of resolutions on the effectiveness of economic cooperation. Human rights should become the basis for dialogue between the Union and China, and the interests of people should stand above economic interests.
The arrest and sentencing of peace campaigner and human rights activist Liu Xiaobo, who has called for greater democracy in China, is a clear signal that our current measures are not effective. Therefore, it is worth taking other steps, apart from resolutions, which will make possible greater respect for what Liu Xiaobo is fighting for, as well as thousands of Chinese people and many other people around the world.
Thirty years ago reforms were begun in China which showed the world that something was changing, that it may do something for the benefit of society. We expect the same today. We want, today, to have a partner which respects principles which, for us, are fundamental.


6. Succession and wills (vote)
- before the vote on Amendment 3:
(DE) Mr President, I move that our Amendment 3 be amended so that, in the English text, the word 'testator' is replaced in its two occurrences by the word 'deceased', and the period for which a normal residence may be maintained is reduced from three to two years.
(Parliament agreed to accept the oral amendment)
- before the vote on Amendment 1:
(DE) Mr President, although this amendment was intended to delete a number of words from our rapporteur's original text, its effect was to delete a few too many of them, so the words 'with binding effect' should stand and not be deleted.
(Parliament agreed to accept the oral amendment)


Written statements (Rule 116): see Minutes


Voting time
The next item is the vote.
(For the results and other details of the vote: see Minutes)
on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. - Mr President, on a point of order, under Rule 160 of the Rules of Procedure, our group has requested that we have roll-call votes today on everything, and I know that has excited some interest in the Chamber.
Just by way of explanation, not just this group but many MEPs from all groups are deeply concerned about the method of voting that takes place in here. In fact, you yourself in the chair just a few months ago said we have made mistakes here, which, in a vote of this size, are statistically normal. We would argue that when we are voting on legislation there should not be any possibility of mistakes being made.
Perhaps I would ask Members, when they are going through this lengthy roll-call procedure, to consider just how important voting is, and perhaps in the light of that we will get MEPs next month, when we vote on the EU Lisbon Treaty, to vote for an amendment to allow those 10 countries that promised their own people a referendum, the opportunity to do so.
(DE) Mr President, I have only one request. Rule 159 of the Rules of Procedure states that 'Normally Parliament shall vote by a show of hands'. For this reason it would be right to examine whether the IND/DEM Group's motion to have all votes taken by roll call is consistent with the Rules of Procedure. I believe it is not. May I ask that this be done by tomorrow. I believe we shall be voting today as stipulated in the voting list, but I would ask that the question of legal admissibility be reviewed by tomorrow.
(IT) Mr President, two things: I think the television camera set up here should be moved to allow Mr Donnici - and all of us - to see the presidency and other colleagues. Let me also take this opportunity to welcome the decision by the European Parliament's Bureau to dedicate Parliament's press room to Anna Politkovskaya.
The House Rules of Procedure state that voting is normally to be by show of hands unless a roll-call vote is specifically requested.
When voting by show of hands it may so happen, not often but from time to time, and only from time to time, that either because MEPs do not raise their hands or because there is some confusion, the presidency makes a mistake when assessing the outcome of a vote. Should that happen then, again frequently, an MEP will request verification and as a result the President holds a roll-call vote to that end and the situation is resolved.
This is all, therefore, provided for, and our votes proceed perfectly correctly 99.9% of the time.
In any event, the President of the Parliament received a letter from Mr Booth MEP noting this issue and requesting action to be taken on it.
This matter will be discussed at the Conference of Presidents and, of course by the working group looking at reform of the House's working methods. This is in train. Please be assured therefore, Mr Farage, that we are going to pay a great deal of attention to this matter and are seeking to ensure that things run more smoothly every day.
Mr Swoboda, we are going to vote today by roll call, which is also in accordance with the Rules of Procedure as a roll-call vote has been requested by a political group. Today. And from today we will take decisions.
Mr President, on that very point, during the last parliamentary term, a group chaired by Mr Corbett, from the PSE Group, submitted proposals to the House to the effect that, if more than 100 amendments were tabled at the plenary stage, then the report in question should be sent back to committee. There have now been a number of occasions when that has not taken place. I wonder if, when recommending to the Conference of Presidents that it look into these matters, you could also recommend it consider the very good recommendations which Mr Corbett brought forward during the last parliamentary term.
Mr President, pursuant to Rule 145, I would just like to make a personal statement. Yes, I have written to the President of Parliament complaining about the voting, as you know. I have updated him several times since then, because my request for full electronic voting was turned down by the committee. Its response was 'no follow-up'. I have, in fact, written several times. The worst case that I have reported was overturned from 'rejected' to 'approved' by 567 votes to 17, with 18 abstentions. That is why I have called this system ludicrous in the past. It really must be dealt with.