Discussion on financial prospects of European Research Institute with Commissioner Figel

Brussels, 02/05/2006 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday afternoon, Commissioner Jan Figel, responsible for education, culture and multilingualism, discussed with members of the European Parliament's Committee on Culture and Education about the financial prospects of the European Institute of Technology.

• Financial perspectives: Thanking the Parliament for supporting the education, culture and youth programmes - which, he said, have made it possible to increase the 2007-2013 financial allocation compared to the European Council's December agreement (a further €800 million have been earmarked for lifelong learning programmes) - the Commissioner said that these were “real improvements” and a very positive sign. Speaking of the legislative process underway for making the programmes effective as of 2007, he pointed out that the European Commission was to adopt a package of proposals amended after the Parliament's vote foreseen for 17 May this year.
• Annual strategy: One of the main objectives of the DG Education and Culture is to contribute to restoring citizen confidence in the European Union and the institutions and to make them more effective. Mr Figel thus said he intended to prepare a recommendation for September on ways to make Europe more citizen-friendly.
• European Institute of Technology: The idea of creating a European research institute was launched in February 2005 in the context of reactivating the Lisbon strategy, Commissioner Figel recalled, speaking of “networking” the existing centres to promote excellence in Europe. “There are centres of excellence but they are not sufficiently interlinked” to have a positive impact on the economy, he commented. This institute should work in a transparent manner, with maximum flexibility, and provide impetus for the existing institutes. Funding for the institute should not only come from European funds but also from the Member States themselves, as well as from the regions and public institutions. Speaking of the state of progress of work for setting up the institute, Mr Figel said he had taken part in a meeting on Tuesday morning to consult with decision-makers from the world of research and academic circles after discussions on Monday with Member State representatives. He gave his assurance that he had clearly understood the message given by the Spring Summit, which called on the Commission to establish a roadmap for the month of June, with a view to publishing a final proposal at the end of the year. “Once we are on this track, things should be in place by 2009-2010”, he hoped. Admitting that there were still many questions unanswered regarding the financing of the institute and intellectual property rights, the Commissioner recommended an “open and constructive” approach, recalling the scepticism with which the Erasmus programme was first greeted, a programme whose success continues to be borne out since it was first implemented in 1987 and which is the '”image of what can be achieved from nothing”, he commented.

The Commissioner's satisfaction regarding the rise in the budget for education programmes was not shared by all MEPs. “There are still many complaints and disappointments (…). It is an enormous problem for many institutes that will have to stop their work”, the Austrian Social Democrat Christa Prets said. “Nothing has been gained for culture and youth. How can we be optimistic when problems go unresolved?”, German Green member Helga Trüpel added, criticising the amounts that continue to be paid out for agriculture. French Socialists Guy Bono said quite simply that it is a “bad compromise”. Only Doris Pack (EPP-ED, Germany) expressed indulgence, pleased that, at the end of the day, more money had been obtained. “Of course, we have gained far less than hoped, I admit, but compared to December there has been a marked improvement”, Jan Figel stressed, hoping that other financial resources would be contributed for the programmes in question, especially via the European Social Fund. On the subject of the European Institute of Technology, Mr Bono spoke of the fear expressed by the European University Association (EUA) which feels that the institute would not create the synergy hoped-for but, on the contrary, would cause more fragmentation. Universities also fear that the best researchers currently employed in excellence centres would be “creamed off”, he said, saying that “there are still many issues to be settled”. Ms Pack was delighted at the idea of placing the current research centres in a network, and Spanish Socialist Maria Badia i Cutchet was obviously seduced by the idea of creating a European research institute, a project that she promises to back, while calling for more information on its structure, the way it operates, and its funding. In answer to these questions, Mr Figel gave his assurance that the institute would not be financed to the detriment of existing institutes. The desire for synergy aims at the goal of excellence ”from which everyone will gain”, with collaboration from the world of research and education and from the business world, he added.

Some MEPs, like Spanish Socialist Enrique Baron, for example, expressed the fear that there would be no exemption for the cultural sector during Doha talks on the liberalisation of goods and services, despite the adoption of the UNESCO Charter on Cultural Diversity under the leadership of the Commission (Ed.: entrusted with the task of defending cultural exemption at the WTO on behalf of the European Union). The negotiating briefs have not been changed, Mr Figel said, adding that the position of the European Union in cultural matters had always been and would remain visible not only concerning the “services” directive but also at the WTO.