XL - Eiropas Parlaments - Europa

126 16-02-2011
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Any such restriction must be
necessary, appropriate and proportionate within a democratic society, and a Commissioner is not in a position to judge or
condemn such national doings, nor do I wish to do so.
On the matter of the absence of reference to Article 30 – and a number of Members have asked about that – I know that
many of you have complained that the Commission has not taken Article 30 fully into account when assessing the media
law. I should like to say loudly and clearly: that is simply not true. Although in its original proposal for the AVMS
Directive the Commission had included an obligation on the Member States to guarantee the independence of the national
regulatory authorities – and I know full well that your memory on such matters is excellent – that provision was not
supported by the Council and, despite strong support from the European Parliament, it was changed into the current
Article 30 of the AVMS Directive. The final wording of the AVMS Directive does not directly establish an obligation to
create independent bodies. It is not what we would have wished but it is what was written down in the text and we have to
accept it, albeit with regret.
The Hungarian authorities have agreed to delete the provision in question and add the following declaratory text to
Article 10 of the Media Constitution, and I quote: ‘It is the task for the entirety of the media system to provide authentic,
rapid and accurate information on such affairs and events’. So that will be the text after the changes.
I have to apologise that you did not receive the text, but I myself did not receive it or, at least, I had only the text that we
were negotiating and I could not distribute that to you. However, as soon as it is possible, I will supply you with the text.
Of course – while I hope you believe what I am saying and I would appreciate that – I imagine that, at the end of the day,
you want to see it in writing and have the opportunity to read it.
One of the issues that will make sense for you when you are making up your minds is that of the balanced reporting
requirements: as I said in my opening remarks, these will no longer apply to the written press or to on-demand audiovisual
media services.
On the question, which Mr Løkkegaard asked, of whether I am ready to propose legislation on media pluralism, I said in
my opening remarks that I am ready to take action in the matter of media pluralism within the existing EU competences.
There is no one-size-fits-all approach: that is clear to me, and the Hungarian case has made it even clearer. I will set up the
working group to which I referred, and I thank you for your willingness to join it, in order to discuss the challenges we are
facing, to make sure we have a comprehensive overview of the situation in Europe and, of course, to act accordingly –
including on the question of media independence. That should be one of the main priorities.
With regard to the position of the OSCE on the Hungarian media legislation, in relation to our own analysis, there is a
difference of legal bases, but the OSCE was quite clear and quite right in its conclusions. The main issues raised by the
OSCE concern the new Media Authority, in particular the long duration of the term of office of its members and the
regulation of the public service broadcaster. I have explained the Commission’s point of view here, and I think that the
terms of office of members of other broadcasting councils, for example in other Member States, range in some cases from
five to nine years. One example but it is not the only one, is the Rundfunkräte (public broadcasting boards).
The crucial thing – and this is my final remark – is the message from the Deputy Prime Minister that I received this
morning when I touched down, and I am certain that the Minister of Foreign Affairs will repeat the message that the
Hungarian Government wrote down for me, and for the Commission, stating what the position is.
During the seven weeks in which we closely cooperated, I had already been impressed by the input of my own staff who
had been working like hell. But I can assure you that both sides worked like hell and that they did their jobs not just in the
proper way but in a constructive way, in order to find a solution, because this is a very important matter, and we have to
find a solution.
3-548
Mario Mauro (PPE). – Signor Presidente, invito il Commissario, per una questione procedurale, a far pervenire stasera
stessa i testi cui faceva riferimento, quanto meno ai presidenti dei gruppi, affinché domani possiamo avere la maggiore
serenità possibile prima di esprimere il nostro voto.
3-549
Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, as far as I am concerned the answer is a clear yes. The
Hungarian minister’s body language is also saying yes. That will be done as soon as possible.
3-550
János Martonyi, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, please appreciate that I do not have to use my body
when I express myself.