In recent times, the media has resounded with EU activity. I am not referring to articles on the constitutional crisis, which are sometimes excellent but often full of commonplace and imprecise assertions. No, I mean the information, studies and comments devoted to European decisions or initiatives of direct concern to citizens, and which have a positive effect on the everyday lives of the ordinary man or woman in the street. European matters have hit front-page news in several newspapers. But the funny thing is that, at the same time, some knowledgeable political commentators continue to reproach the EU for not doing enough of interest to the citizens. They even go on about those ridiculous legends on Europe, regarding the size of peas or the obligation to give pigs toys. Some commentators show off their lack of intellect in this way - while other journalists bring a useful and concrete Europe to the knowledge of the readers.
Telephone borders to disappear. The star of these “citizen weeks” was Viviane Reding, who, on behalf of the European Commission, very recently announced the agreement reached between the European Parliament and the Council on the significant reduction of the cost of mobile phone calls from one member state to the next (international roaming costs). Due to the excessive cost, the young in particular (but families in general) considerably limit the number of phone calls they make when abroad. In practice, in the Europe without borders where the four “freedoms of movement” - persons, goods, capital and persons - work without (or almost without) obstacle, one border still exists: - the telephone border. It is understandable that the cost should be slightly higher when the real cost is higher, but the Commission discovered real abuse in this sector. Mobile phone operators benefit from earnings that go far beyond economic constraints. The companies concerned made every effort to keep their acquired advantages - which is only understandable. They took several autonomous measures to get on the right side of the European authorities and they offered voluntary commitments. But Ms Reding did not give way, and managed to have compulsory tariff ceilings introduced, which will soon mean radical reductions. A number of firms have announced their intention to put up their national tariffs to offset this fall in income, but they have not impressed the commissioner, who said: “Competition between operators is fierce - those who put up their tariffs will push themselves out of the market”. It remains to be seen whether the new tariffs will be in force by next month, for the summer holiday period. It is not easy, but at any rate any possible delay will not exceed a few weeks. The result is already there.
This result was only possible at European level. At national level, each government would have to negotiate with the other 26 to set up agreement networks. And some governments would no doubt have given way to pressure from powerful national operators. The European decision was reached on 7 June, and the texts will appear in the Official Journal before the end of this month.
A new European landscape for television. Another European result in the field of telecommunications was reached at the end of May this year, although the media explosion was somewhat slower. After 18 months of talks (and several years of preparations), the agreement was reached between member states on the new directive proposed by Ms Reding, “Television without Frontiers”, which in fact covered all audiovisual media. The European Parliament has pointed out that it will be calling for amendments during its second reading this autumn, as most of the demands were taken on board by the Commission and accepted by the Council. The new directive may therefore be published at the end of the year, and the member states will then have two years in which to implement it. In 2009, the European televisual landscape will be completely renovated, in line with technological innovations. And we all know how sensitive public opinion is to anything shown on the “goggle box”, whether it be news (especially sports news, which gives the biggest show of our time) or fiction.
I am not unaware of the fact that some user associations have been critical of the standards set for indirect advertising (e.g. to promote a product during a film of fiction). But, without claiming to be an expert on the matter, I have the impression that the priority objectives have been attained, these being: protection of children, maximum duration of advertising (12 minutes per hour), ethical norms (such as a prohibition on inciting hatred), and new rules for indirect advertising (in some member states it is totally free for now).
In the future member states that authorise this practice will have to inform spectators and “product placement” in children's programmes will be banned). Member states will still be free to apply more restrictive standards for direct and indirect advertising.
For creation. Expressing her satisfaction, Ms Reding highlighted the effects of the new regulation for European televisual and cinematographic development, “I did not want new technology, like video, to lead to even more American content but to provide instead an opportunity for European content…My aim was to make the way ahead easier by getting rid of the barriers to films and products in getting funding and getting them distributed to the public. The new directive goes in this direction”. The commissioner pointed out the results of the Media programme: 11 films supported by this EU programme were nominated at the Cannes festival.
The Media programme reminds me a bit of Erasmus. A few years ago, when a successful film told the story of students from several countries studying together in Barcelona as part of this programme, no-one knew that this was a European programme that Jacques Delors had devised and funded through the EU budget. The director did not refer to this. Today, we know about it. Similarly, we will know one day how many films by young directors there are thanks to the Media programme.
And this is not all: in the autumn, Ms Reding will present a “telecoms package” that aims to set up a genuine European telecommunications market that both covers competition problems (very delicate in this sector) and frequency arbitration etc.
Passenger rights. The second European commissioner who experienced his few hours of fame for achievements accomplished in favour of citizens is vice president Jacques Barrot. The vigour of his speeches and action, as well as the results that he has achieved for enhancing passenger rights by plane and train, including improvements to compensation conditions when transporters are at fault, have seen the European Commission on the receiving end of a considerable amount of recognition and praise. Barrot's responsibilities certainly go well beyond the battles won on behalf of citizens. We only need to point out that he is responsible for the Galileo project (the events affecting it and the lessons learnt from it warrant a specific commentary, which I will soon be publishing) as well as Trans-European networks by railway, road and waterways. His activities can be characterised by being anchored in the real word and the concrete accomplishments that he has achieved. The newspapers, however, choose their subjects according to their own criteria. Attention focused on the EU when Mr Barrot convinced member states and MEPs of the need to impose binding rules on airlines and railways.
If we listed all the initiatives of the vice president in support of citizens, the list would be a long one, with maritime safety at the top of it, given the effects of the package of measures planned on for fighting sea and coastal pollution. A new action will soon be opening up: that of urban transport. Political choices (public services or competition?) and operational decisions will obviously remain in the hands of the cities. The EU, nonetheless, will be able to define a structure that provides “green propulsion” and “intelligent transport”, by contributing to the funding of research and exchanges in “good practices” (see Agata Byczewsk article in EUROPE 9441).
Europe of health for all. Decisions regarding health and medicines can be noted on the first page of Europe. In particular, the Parliament/Council agreement, facilitated approval on 31 May of the regulation on innovative therapies (EUROPE 9436) and was welcomed by much of the press, with sometimes spectacular headlines. Innovative therapies in the long term, could possibly cure diseases that in the past were incurable; experts in some cases speak about quite short time frames of three or four years or even less.
These therapies involve questions that are not just scientific but are also ethically complicated and sensitive: the debates at the European Parliament prove this. To be efficient and fair, legislation has to be European, authorisations for an innovative medicine will be granted by the European Medicines Agency based in London). If a medicine was authorised in one member state and banned in another, we would have a geometrically variable “Europe of medicine”. According to the Eurodis association (which deals with rare diseases), this could result in inequalities between the rich and poor because countries that ban an innovative medicine would deprive the poorest people from getting it, while the wealthy would just have to go across the border to obtain it. It's not just rare diseases that are implicated: all those who suffer from cardiac problems are likely to benefit from innovative therapies. The Europe of health benefits everybody.
(F.R.)