11/04/2002 21
4-001
ENSITTING OF THURSDAY, 11 APRIL 2002
___________________________
11/04/2002 21
4-002
ENIN THE CHAIR: MR ONESTA
Vice-President
(The sitting was opened at 10 a.m.)[1] <BRK>
4-003
ENRübig (PPE-DE). – (DE) Mr President, I just wanted to observe that the ventilation of this House – by which I mean the whole building – was extreme this week and a very large number of Members have gone down with colds. I would ask you to have the building's ventilation system checked.
(Applause) <BRK>
4-004
ENPresident. – We certainly take note of your point. Members should perhaps also be shown how to use the small button on their desks in order to control the temperature themselves. <BRK>
4-005
ENProtection of minors and human dignity
4-006
ENPresident. – The next item is the report (A5-0037/2002) by Mr Beazley, on behalf of the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport, on the evaluation report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the application of the Council Recommendation of 24 September 1998 concerning the protection of minors and human dignity [COM(2001) 106 – C5-0191/2001 – 2001/2087(COS)]. <BRK>
4-007
ENBeazley (PPE-DE), rapporteur. – Mr President, may I first pay credit to my colleague, Mr Heaton-Harris, for the initial work he did in drafting this report before he moved to another committee.
The rapid development of the audio-visual media has brought many real benefits in terms of education, spreading greater awareness of public affairs around the world, and not least in the field of entertainment.
However, along with the undoubted advantages, there have also been concerns that, given the generally greater adeptness of children at using audio-visual resources, in some areas there are dangers of their obtaining access to unsuitable or harmful material. This is most obvious in the fields of overt sexual material and gratuitous violence.
The principles which have guided this report are to encourage greater public awareness of these issues and to support parental responsibility and to develop co-operation between the content providers, consumer organisations and the respective authorities, both national and European. Self-regulation is considered to be the main instrument, underpinned by legal requirements where necessary.
The report, which analyses the Commission's evaluation report, is primarily concerned with the Internet and with video games, as it was felt important not to anticipate a possible future review of the Television without Frontiers directive. The report calls for user-friendly content filter systems to enable parents to predetermine the sort of content which they feel is unsuitable viewing for their children and, in this regard I very much welcome the fact that, since the report was first drafted, the Internet Content Rating Association (ICRA), has launched a filter system available free of charge, an initiative supported by the Commission.
We also called for greater public awareness, for education campaigns and hotlines to be set up, as already exists in TV broadcasting, so that complaints about illegal or harmful content may be recorded by consumers, particularly by parents.
We consider that so-called 'Internet Chat Rooms' should be subject to greater monitoring, both of the rules for their installation and in relation to their use. As far as video games are concerned, we call upon the Member States to continue to promote the rating of video games, again through self-regulation, but if that is considered to be inadequate in some cases, it should be backed up by the introduction of agreed minimum standards of content and promotion. It is also hoped that the Member States will continue to exchange best practice in this field and co-ordinate measures which are taken in co-operation with the industry and with content providers.
The report does not seek to sensationalise or exaggerate perceived dangers, but it does provide a useful framework to encourage public awareness of the risks involved and to provide practical remedies. Finally, Parliament calls on the Commission to draw up a further report, preferably before the end of this year, on the implementation of the recommendation with specific reference to implementation in each Member State. I commend the report to the House.
(Applause) <BRK>
4-008
ENSanders-ten Holte (ELDR). – (NL) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the protection of minors and human dignity is an issue that is close to the hearts of us all. It is therefore to be welcomed that the Commission has presented this evaluation report on the progress we are making in this area in relation to audio-visual media and the Internet. Mr Beazley, as Mr Heaton-Harris before him, has drafted a sterling report on the subject.
Nevertheless, I should like to take this opportunity of drawing your attention once again to the fact that technical resources and legislation from above are not sufficient to guarantee this protection. There are always ways and means, devious or otherwise, to get round this, and certainly children are very resourceful in this area. Self-regulation, as is now being applied on a large scale, appears to be a very handy instrument. However, I want to point out again at this juncture that instilling awareness in minors themselves, as well as their parents and educators, is still the best way forward. This is possible by, on the one hand, paying ample attention to media education at school, so that minors can be taught to identify harmful content for themselves, and, on the other hand, by providing educators with a tool, such as the Dutch ‘viewer guide’ classification system “kijkwijzer” [viewer guide].. This is a system on which we had a very interesting hearing yesterday and in which I am also personally involved in the Netherlands. It is a well thought-out system which actually works, and by means of which children can handle audio-visual media products with awareness. The system is also accompanied by an age category. MG6 means: six years, parental guidance desirable, and, in this way, adults are reminded once again of their responsibilities, for uninterested parents produce vulnerable children. I would therefore call on the Member States and the Commission, when studying best practices, to keep this classification system in mind and, when planning school curricula, to make room for media education too. <BRK>
4-009
ENEcherer (Verts/ALE). – (DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, I would like first to congratulate Mr Beazley on his report and thank him for his good cooperation. This topic is, as my predecessor on the floor has confirmed, close to all our hearts. There are many points on which we agree, such as trust being a better fundamental premise for this common endeavour than overall control or even censorship, neither of which would serve as a good basis for cooperation.
We also agree that we must advertise the hotlines more extensively in order for them to be used, as we desire, right across the whole of Europe, and in order for us to be able to establish where protection is needed. We agree, too, that we have to provide parents with the right tools to enable them, together with their children, to assess which TV programmes, computer games, and films are the right ones for their children, and in order to support them in their judgment of the programmes. On this I agree with Mrs Sanders-ten Holte, who spoke before me. This is where moving closer on a European level to a uniform system of classification for the whole audio-visual sector seems to be of the greatest and most urgent importance, as that would be a tool facilitating control by parents and young people themselves, one that could also function on the basis of trust and not tend towards either excessive control or censorship.
I now come to what I believe is at the moment the most important point in connection with this ‘box’, namely that the Internet strikes many as a sort of ‘wonderbox’; they stand in front of it and are simply overwhelmed by all the stuff that comes out of it, forgetting in the process what influences can come into play, especially on children and young people, if we do not consciously discern what is heading in our direction. Let me emphasise it three times, four times, ten times over: media literacy. Media literacy – we cannot start too soon on heightening awareness of it and on playing our part in developing it. To do this, we also need not only the political willingness; we also need more programmes. For them, we need money. Perhaps we will achieve some sort of collaboration with all the players at the European level, something which is, at the end of the day, in the interests of all.
(Applause) <BRK>
4-010
ENPapayannakis (GUE/NGL). – (EL) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, our experience following the quantum leap in the mass media, especially television, is increasing daily. I am sure you have all witnessed in your countries, as I have witnessed in mine, the boom in cheap ‘big brother’ type television programmes in which people agree to be imprisoned, for want of a better word, while viewers are invited to peep through the keyhole, waiting for something titillating to happen, usually – to be frank – a sex scene, or for something unexpected or interesting to happen. But, at the same time, this sort of programme encourages viewers – especially young viewers – to look on the people playing this sort of lottery, betting body and soul in the hope of winning money at the expense of the others, as role models.
These programmes are objectionable and absurd but we cannot attack them through legislation or administrative intervention. As other speakers have said, technical rules do no good, nor does informing and educating children, because forbidden fruit does, of course, taste sweeter. None of this is enough especially, Commissioner, as everyone will be able to access this sort of programme on the Internet sooner or later. I think we need some sort of European legislation and regulations with more teeth than we have at present. I do not have a great deal of faith in self-regulation because competition lives by its own – very powerful – rules. However, it would be no bad thing if we could come up with some sort of more binding code of conduct than we have at present. If we were to give parents and consumers the right to lay siege to the producers of these cheap programmes, it would, perhaps, provide some small counterweight to competition. And, of course, we could look at the more technical question of watersheds to draw a dividing line between when children watch television and their bedtime and when these programmes go out.
However, even with all this, unless we come up with something more original and imaginative, I shall persist in my pessimism as to the future and the success of this sort of programme. <BRK>
4-011
ENBlokland (EDD). – (NL) Mr President, the Internet and television have changed the world. Knowledge and information at your fingertips, 24 hours a day and in large quantities. As I have indicated in previous speeches, however, the Internet and television are a reflection of society. The Commission evaluation report and the report by the rapporteur, Mr Beazley, confirm this. Both media are also used for criminal and degrading purposes. I am pleased with the Commission evaluation report and the rapporteur’s report. It is encouraging that the Commission is able to conclude that, in many Member States, a great deal is being done to prevent the distribution of child pornography. This also applies to other degrading and illegal activities. Attention is rightly drawn to the need for the Commission to continue to urge the Member States to implement the provisions in the recommendation.
The rapporteur is also right to draw attention to parental responsibility in the first place, but also to the responsibility of the government and of suppliers of Internet products. They must jointly ensure that human beings are valued as unique creatures and not as instruments to fulfil personal needs. Children, in particular, deserve protection in this area, so that they can develop a healthy image of human beings. This is not just about child pornography. This is also about racism, hatred and other forms of degrading excrescences which can so easily be spread via the Internet and television.
The global reach of the Internet and television requires an international approach. The wish expressed by Member States to subject national legislative frameworks to minimum standards at European, and probably global, level receives my approval. In my view, the combination of national frameworks and international minimum standards makes sense. This does justice to the global problem and cultural diversity. Moreover, the maintenance of a national legislative framework does not give the Member States the opportunity of hiding behind international legislation.
The proposal to consult all parties involved when drafting codes of conduct and other ways of preventing the distribution of pornography and racist material is useful. I should, however, like to add that, in matters of censorship and handling illegal material, the police and justice departments are the legally competent authorities.
Finally, I should like to urge the European Commission to encourage the Member States to continue to pay attention to evils which are distributed via television, video games and films. From the report, it is clear that less progress has been made in these areas than in the area of the Internet. Less clear-cut evils are still evils. And where the protection of minors and human dignity are concerned, we cannot be alert enough. <BRK>