Brussels, 04/05/2006 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday 2 May Margot Wallström presented the Commission's White Paper on the information and communications strategy for MEPs on the Constitutional Affairs Committee (EUROPE 9121, 9122 and 9123). The European Commissioner in charge of this strategy also mentioned a recent Commission seminar on the future of Europe (EUROPE 9182). MEPs discussed the idea of a European Charter on information and communication. Some of them underlined the importance of working with the media, others were concerned about the preliminary results from the Eurobarometer survey No. 64.
Ms Wallström declared that, “citizens have the right of knowing what the European Union does and why”. She pointed out that there is “a very large demand from European leaders” as well as a demand to participate in the political debate. She reiterated the proposal from the White Paper for elaborating “a charter or a code of conduct” that officially recognised “the right of citizens to information” and defined “common principles” governing such a law. She added that actors could commit themselves on “a voluntary basis” to respecting these principles and citizens would know “what they could expect”. The Commissioner pointed to the “consultation” launched with regard to the European Charter and regretted the “10% fall in funding for information about the EU” planned in the 2007 budget.
Gérard Onesta (Greens/EFA, France) rapporteur on this issue said that they had “given a lot out with regard to decorative charters” but wanted “something more binding”. He considered it impossible to “divorce the content” from the information exercise. He said that no communication could work if it were disembodied. British Liberal Andrew Duff declared that he was troubled by the proposal on the code of conduct and affirmed that he was not convinced of the need for a charter asserting the need for telling the truth about European affairs.
On the White Paper, Mr Onesta wanted to see a “hierarchy of partners” such as “civil society”, which still needed developing at a European level as “European political parties were finding it difficult to take off” and “journalists remained the essential vectors of opinion”. Alexander Stubb (EPP/ED, Finland) said that there were only two genuinely European media sources, “The Financial Times and Euronews” and the rest went by way of a national angle. Spanish Socialist Carlos Carnero Gonzalez regretted the image the EU had, “and which the media gave it, which was increasingly negative”. He affirmed that “a fundamental factor is working with the media” and called on the Commission to take action alongside governments. Maria da Assunçao Esteves (EPP-ED, Portugal) wanted the White Paper to focus more on television. Johannes Voggenhuber (Greens/EFA, Austria) declared that “journalists are vectors of information, not the bodies that publish the press releases”. He also wanted to debate the question of “monopolies” in the media. Jo Leinen, the German Social Democrat considered that the question of the European media was a difficult one “but European parties ought to be easier”. The President of the parliamentary committee mentioned that his report on the case required “a European status” for European parties and the setting up of “European political foundations” that were active in training representatives (EUROPE 9161).
James Huge Allister (non-attached, United Kingdom) did not believe that there was anything really concrete in the White Paper regarding “right to access documents”. Ashley Mote (non-attached, United Kingdom) said that the idea of Europe was not seen as public property.
Ms Wallström referred to the results from the Commission's seminar on the future of Europe. She declared that, “thanks to these results we can demonstrate the added value of the EU”. She added that the College of Commissioner had tackled three questions: growth and jobs, conclusions from the Hampton Court Summit under the British Presidency and concrete action such as that in the “energy” sector. The Commissioner also asked what else they needed to define “a positive agenda” for the European Union. During the seminar, Wallström also indicated that there had been questions about constitutional aspects and that on a number of occasions that they repeated the need to “extend the period of reflection”.
In connection with the preliminary results from the Eurobarometer 2004 survey on public opinion in the EU, Alexander Stubb noted “a negative trend” demonstrating “developing Euro-scepticism” in the EU. Ms Wallström acknowledged that the survey indicated that the “desire for approving accession to the EU had declined over recent months” notably in Finland, Austria and Latvia. She did say, however, the citizens had “more confidence in the EU than in their national governments”, particularly with regard to social protection and the fight against terrorism. Commissioner Wallström believes that they have to better explain enlargement, both that of the past and future.