Legislative Observatory
European Parliament
Please fill in this field to find a procedure

Action in the field of culture: Culture 2007 programme (2007-2013)

2004/0150(COD)

 The committee approved the report drafted by Vasco GRAÇA MOURA (EPP-ED, PT) amending the Commission’s proposal at first reading (codecision). The key amendments related to the financial reference amount which MEPs considered to be insufficient. They therefore increased the multiannual budget of the programme from EUR 408 million for 2007-2013 to EUR 600 million and proposed a new budget breakdown between the individual actions making up the programme:

  •  Strand 1 (support for projects) - the total percentage of the programme budget was reduced from 77%, as originally proposed, to 75%. Within this strand, expenditure on cooperation measures was increased from 24% to 30%, while expenditure on cooperation focal points (which the committee wanted to rename 'multi-annual cooperation networks') was reduced from 36% to 29% and expenditure on special actions from 17% to 16%;
  • Strand 2 (support for organisations) - the total percentage of the programme budget was increased from 10% to 14%;
  • Strand 3 (analysis and information) - the 5% share of the programme budget was left unchanged.

MEPs also proposed cutting expenditure on the programme’s management from 8% to 6%.

 

In other amendments, the committee advocated :

  • measures aimed at ensuring a strengthened sense of European citizenship and "heightened awareness of a shared cultural heritage of European significance";
  • greater synergy between education and culture;
  • support for the training and employment of artists;
  • the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity in all its forms in Europe.

 

The committee felt that support for 'sites of memory' (memorials to the victims of Nazism and Stalinism) should take place not within the Culture Programme, but rather within the framework of the new ‘Citizens for Europe’ programme.

Lastly, MEPs adopted a series of technical amendments favouring smaller projects, introducing greater flexibility as regards length of projects, relaxing the criteria for participation, raising the percentage ceiling on the level of Community grant, and reducing the minimum level of grant which may be awarded. They also stressed that the programme’s objectives must be reviewed in a transparent evaluation process involving the European Parliament.