Committee on Culture and Education Ordinary meeting
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
CULT European Parliament
Follow its sittingsGlenn Micallef
We face a choice. If we do not speak up, what does that say about our values? When the International Paralympic Committee decides to invite Russian and Belarusian athletes who have not qualified to compete in these competitions, to parade their flag, to play their anthem, to bring back their uniform, reversing every safety protocol that was previously accepted, we face a choice. And if we do not speak up, what does that say about our values? So, when sports federations and associations unilaterally decide to make these reinstatements, bringing aggressors along with their flags, their items, and all their symbolism.
As the hostilities continue and Ukrainians lose their lives, we face a choice. One of the choices is to stay silent. But if we stay silent, that is also sending a message. And, in my opinion, silence is complicity. That silence is a profound insult to the memory of those who have lost their lives and for everything that they have fought for.
And institutions such as ours have a moral duty to take a stand. This is not interference in sport. It's not an interference with the respect of autonomy, but it's a statement on the values that we claim to defend. It's not an infringement of the autonomy of sports organizations. We don't want to create any discrimination based on nationality or whichever passport an athlete holds.
This is about standing up. This is about being clear. It's about being firm, and it's about recognizing that sport does not exist in a vacuum. This is the reason why I have decided not to attend the opening ceremony of the Paralympic Games, and I am happy to see that there were like-minded partners who will join in this principled stand. And I do so while standing firmly with the Paralympians and applauding the dedication and achievements of many Paralympic athletes who deserve our full respect.
Now, this point on standing up for our belief sets me up perfectly for a discussion on youth in the digital age. And I will shortly give some more details on the action plan for cyberbullying. But first, I want to take a moment to thank and put on record my gratitude for the services of the European Commission Executive Vice President, Virkunen, who was also here this morning. Because in a very difficult environment where the protection of our citizens is most often deliberately labeled as censorship, they have been doing a fantastic job. I continue to believe that protecting people online is a moral duty and a collective responsibility that we have.
And it's one that the commission takes very seriously. Recent decisions that we have taken to put our legal framework to work are clear evidence of this. And here, I want to mention the extension of the investigation of X into Grok, the publication of the preliminary results on the TikTok investigation on the addictive design of this platform, the investigation in the machine under the DSA, and these are some examples of how seriously the Commission is taking this issue, showing our strong commitment to safeguard and protect Europeans and minors in online spaces. The first thing that I want to say here on this issue is that protection should never be mistaken for the exclusion of young people or citizens from online spaces. So, I want to reflect on the issue of the minimum age of consent when it comes to social media.
For me, it's very clear that it is for parents and not for algorithms to raise children in our society. And this is exactly why the Commission has set up an expert group to give advice on this issue. Because the well-being of the youngest members of our society should never be something that we experiment with, we should take decisions based on expert advice. At the same time, we have to avoid fragmentation in the digital single market. And there are a number of member states.
There are a few member states that have decided to put in place or announce measures already. For me, it is crucial that we coordinate. The advice from experts should come before 2025, and then we can make a decision on the next steps. At this stage, nothing is excluded, and nothing should be excluded, including the possibility of legislative intervention on this issue if it is deemed necessary. It's also important to make a distinction between platforms.
We need tailored approaches according to the kind of platform that we are dealing with. This is something that was strongly emphasized by young people in our consultations as part of the president's Youth Advisory Board. With this, I want to go directly to the cyberbullying action plan. And this is an action plan that is designed to save lives, literally. "Stronger together" means that we are safer online.
And the Internet has to be a safe space, a place where young people can grow, where they can learn, and where they can be connected to one another. For many, especially young people across Europe, the Internet continues to be a tool, and we should see it as such. I want to spare you a lot of numbers, but there is one that I cannot avoid and that I want to mention. And it is a figure of 25%, a quarter of all children, all minors in Europe, who say that they have personally witnessed bullying and difficult situations in online spaces. This is one of the main reasons why people are calling our Safer Internet Centers.
This is a situation they face in online spaces, where they are confronted by lies, threats, and images altered by artificial intelligence. And this is exactly what young people see when they unlock their phone. Unfortunately, this is something that is constant. It doesn't just happen during a limited time when people are in school. It happens throughout the whole day, and it has become a constant.
It's amplified by virality. It's amplified by algorithms, and it is being amplified by artificial intelligence. And we have to say that this is not a normal situation. For us, prevention and protection, the way we see it, are a public duty, and it's a public responsibility that we have to take action in this regard, protecting Europeans in online spaces just as we do in the physical world. The action plan on cyberbullying focuses on making sure that technology works for citizens, not the other way around, and that we take an approach of safety by design and safety by default.
The action plan focuses on three things: prevention through education, protection through clear rules, and empowerment through simple and trusted tools. We're putting forward in this action plan 22 actions, 13 of which we will implement as the European Commission, and nine actions where we propose to team up with member states to implement them together, teaming up to scale up. So, what are these proposals? First, the action plan offers a common understanding of the issue. Stronger rules mean that we have safer fields, and we want a zero-tolerance approach when it comes to cyberbullying.
The starting point is a definition of cyberpulling, as we've proposed in the action plan: a definition that rests on some key elements, including the fact that there is a power imbalance. It's a repetitive issue and an issue where someone feels unsafe in the digital space. Going further, we're proposing to update the guidelines on the protection of minors that we have under the Digital Services Act, placing more emphasis on the protection of younger and vulnerable citizens in digital spaces. To complement this, we want to ensure the implementation of the AI Act's transparency obligations. And here, this will include a code of practice on marking and labeling content that is generated using artificial intelligence.
We also propose to work with member states to make sure that they develop coherent national cyberbullying policies at the national level as well. Then, moving on to prevention. Prevention is about understanding. Understanding is about raising awareness, and awareness is what we need to break stigma. We want to ensure that people can prevent harm, but to be able to prevent harm, they first need to recognize it when they see it.
We want to ensure that people feel safe to speak up, and that when they do, they don't feel blamed for it. Our proposal here is to invest more in digital skills and digital literacy. We want to help young people navigate online spaces safely. We want to make sure that they are educated to spot harm and to ask for help without fear or shame. To make this work, we have to have a whole-of-society approach, and we have to team up to scale up.
We have to make this work everywhere, using whatever works and whatever we have at our disposal. So, we have to use a safer internet center. We have to use the Better Internet for Kids platform and every tool at our disposal to make sure that this reaches everyone. And this must include clear and practical guidance for educators to help them spot harm, manage these situations, and ensure that they become one of the first lines of defense in this issue. So, this is something that we have to see in classrooms, sports clubs, community centers, volunteer spaces, and across the board in our societies.
Because wherever young people play, wherever they are getting their education, these are the spaces that must be at the center of our attention. And our goal should be clear. We should aim to build a generation of informed, confident, and digitally literate citizens, which enables them to prevent harm and act early when they see it. Then, the final chapter is on empowerment. Empowerment means that we must make it easier to report bullying than for people to bully others in online spaces.
Reporting must make a difference, and empowerment means that help must be available with one click. And here, we have solutions that are already in place and being implemented in member states. And what we want to do is scale them up. So, we want to support the rollout of an accessible online safety app across the European Union. Because empowerment means that you know that when you speak up, someone is acting and someone is supporting you.
Now, for all this, I have a special word of thanks to all those people who have participated in the continuous consultations that we've had over the last months to develop this action plan, to you and your ideas, the ideas that you've shared with us in the consultation phase. The children who have come up and shared their views on our child participation platform—6,400 children—were giving direct feedback that helped design this action plan. The youth councils that participated in the discussion in the president's youth advisory board on this issue, but also on the issue of the impact of social media, the victims of cyberbullying who have spoken to us and who have reached out. And here, we have to pass on the message to them that we hear them, that we see them, and that we are acting to make the situation better than it is. And finally, to all the young Europeans who participated in our consultations, in our youth policy dialogues, and in our process to make sure that we involve them as co-creators of this action plan.
This is exactly how we want to work in the development of the European youth strategy, the upcoming youth strategy, by doubling down on our commitment to use the youth policy dialogues, the European citizens' panels, the president's youth advisory board, the EU youth stakeholders group, and the European youth dialogue, giving young people real responsibility in the way we shape and design policies at the European Union level. I want to conclude with a message in Maltese because I know that for the first time since we've been having this structured exchange, we have interpretation. And I want to.
I would like to give my thanks to all the athletes who have participated in the Winter Olympics in Milan and Cortina. We've seen excellent performances in a beautiful spirit. I would like to thank Milan and Cortina. I think they've done a fantastic job in their preparations for these Winter Olympics. Thank you to the Italian government and all of the workers who have helped in the organization of these Olympics.
Those who have worked in the health sector and those in safety and security, special thanks to all the volunteers. They have given hours of work, and nothing would have been possible without them. To all the coaches, to all the relatives of these athletes who made sure that these Winter Olympics were a success. To conclude, I think that these Winter Olympics have made Italy proud and even us, as part of the European Union. We are so proud.
It was a very special moment, even during the opening and closing ceremonies. I enjoyed seeing the European Union flag and the hymn Ode to Joy, like we saw in Paris in 2024. And I think that these Winter Olympics have shown the best of Europe. So, thank you, and congratulations to all who were involved, especially the athletes. Thank you.
Thank you.
Speaker 5
Language is very nice. German is also a nice language, but sometimes it sounds a bit hard. Goodbye, but I was with German now. Thank you.
Nela Riehl
Thank you for your presentation. So now it's time for the coordinators from each group. They have up to 3 minutes each to react. We will once again begin with the first four groups, and then you can answer before the next four groups. So, we'll begin with the EPP.
Thank you.
Speaker 6
Thank you very much. Chairperson and Commissioner. Dear colleagues, thank you very much, Commissioner. We have already heard how we want to structure our action plan. And we have to say that we are speaking here about a moral, social, and ethical dilemma when we talk about bullying on the Internet, and I'm not only talking about young people.
Yesterday in Zagreb, there was a large conference with ministers, the Minister of Education, the Minister of Justice, and 100 young people aged 15 to 18, and we discussed this topic. They posed an interesting question, which we haven't put anywhere yet. They want to know how they can teach their parents to protect themselves in a world they don't understand: the digital world. This is their moral dilemma, and it shows their empathy, which we in this committee often thought did not exist. We keep saying that we need digital and media literacy, but I wish to repeat that, unfortunately or fortunately, this is in the remit of the member states.
You told us that we need this, but how and with which financial instruments? And this is what we need to get the answer to. Furthermore, the young people we talked to were very concerned about politics. They wanted a stronger regulatory framework. So, I would like to know at what stage the mini wallet, which is supposed to check the age of people, is.
So, could you please prepare for one of our future meetings? This is still in the pilot phase in 5 countries. People are asking how you are going to help us. So, there's no point in member states having different solutions for the age limit. How can we say that in one member state, maybe they can vote when they are 16, but they are not digitally of age when they are 16?
So, this is another dilemma that young people pose. We have to talk to the young people whose future we are deciding. I welcome the action plan. I'm glad that after 4 years, we finally have a common definition of cyberbullying. And I hope that you will be able to work faster because, otherwise, I'm afraid AI will do the job instead of us.
Thank you.
Speaker 7
Thank you. Ana Hale from the S&D. Thank you to our commissioner for his presentation. I would like to begin by addressing what he said about sports policy. It's about how sport organizations such as FIFA are involved with symbols.
FIFA has expressed itself politically. We can't have this. We also can't understand the focus on a helmet. I hope that all colleagues support me in supporting Vladislitch from Ukraine and give him the opportunity to speak at the cyberbullying action plan. The time is necessary.
The time is ripe. 97% of young people use the Internet for more than 8 hours a day. There are very young people on platforms, and platform providers even admit that their own age restrictions are not being followed, and they are confronted with cyberbullying. So my question is about the planned measures on age verification, which are involved with the digital wallet. Another question involves the protection of minors.
Piracy, sporting events, and credit card fraud. So, I'm wondering in what direction the commission's measures are going in order to have a harmonized legal act. And then I'd also like to refer to the youth check that was mentioned earlier in the agenda and the corresponding youth strategy. We heard that there are young people who come from rural areas that are not organized, not working, or not in training, and they have difficult situations. It's difficult for them to take part in youth projects. So, I wonder how that will work with the youth check, how the committee is going to be chosen, and when this committee will begin working.
Thank you.
And now for Miss Grisi from the...
Speaker 9
Thank you very much. I want to talk about Agora EU. Now, culture has always been a political thing, and therefore, this Agora approach is a way of simplifying the media. We need to have specifications that have been chosen to provide for democratic resilience and fight against disinformation and foreign interference, so we can see a will to impose European soft power to affirm our culture and our values in the face of other powers. But is that really the aim?
Speaker 10
Because all of the ideas of sovereignty within the EU are based on financing. We have just seen a large amount of money given to new media companies, which tend to be militant left-wing organizations. So, we feel that we need to do more on culture and media. So my question is, does the commission recognize that Agora EU explicitly directs finance to a certain wing of the European media? Agora EU has also provided financing, which looks more like subsidies to media, universities, influencers, fact checkers, and observatories.
Speaker 9
What are we going to be asking for in exchange, other than asking them to be complicit with a hand that feeds them? So, there is a cascade effect. We're going to delegate to third parties the responsibility of distributing these subsidies. And, as with the CAP, citizens won't feel the benefit. So, what we would say is that where financing is explicitly political, the EU needs to make sure that it is distributed equitably, not based on ideology.
Speaker 13
Therefore, there is the general question of independence within the media, within civil society, and within institutions. So, my question is: will the commission genuinely guarantee full transparency in terms of beneficiaries, and will there be genuine pluralism? And if so, how are you going to achieve that? Thank you.
Speaker 12
Thank you, Chair, and welcome, Commissioner. I'm glad to hear that you came to Italy to see the Olympics, especially because it is important to see the images of sport. We will then have the Paralympics afterwards in March, and there will be even more genuine emotions because there is real inclusivity in that form of sport. Therefore, in response to a question from the Olympic Games Commissioner, I would like to remind you that Europe has done incredibly well in the medals table, with Italy, France, and Germany leading the ranking. So, we have some extraordinary athletes. But in 2030, we will have the Winter Olympics in France.
Speaker 11
We'll have the Los Angeles Olympics in 2028. So, outside of the EU, and then they'll be coming back to the EU. So let me remind you that there are over €5,000,000,000 in income. There have been all sorts of workers and volunteers. So all of the numbers add up to one thing, Commissioner, which is that it's very important that we invest in sport.
For the last 18 months, we have been meeting here in this committee meeting, in this room, and we've had an excellent chair. But often, we end up talking about young people who are struggling. My colleague earlier talked about the fact that young people spend 6 to 8 hours online on social platforms. Now, I've been involved in 3 different Winter Olympics myself, and I'm a little bit older now. But I'm just wondering, those 6 to 8 hours a day of digital life, what are they bringing?
Sport is essential. We need to see young people reengaging with sport because we can't just talk about these young people who are struggling with depression, mental health issues, and social issues. What are we talking about? When I was a child, maybe I had less money. I had fewer opportunities, but I was much happier.
My children used to play with other children. So what we need to do is make sure that we raise bold, ambitious young people, young citizens who can be engaged through sports. At the moment, we have spent just over 400 million euros on sport, which is about €2,000,000 per member state to encourage sports and sporting activities. Therefore, I hope that in the next MFF, we can genuinely invest more money in sport because that will actually cost less than the bill for sending our children to see a psychiatrist or for having some kind of care in the community.
Nela Riehl
Thank you for this call. And so, Commissioner, you have five minutes to address this before we go to the next four groups.
Glenn Micallef
Laura, I have to say I love your statement, and I love your question. And if there is someone who is supportive of the importance of making concrete, significant investments in sport, because we should not see this as a cost. It's an investment. It's an investment in people. It's an investment in well-being, both physical and mental.
Physical, because we have in Europe the highest rate of physical inactivity among our people, leading to significant costs when it comes to public health expenditures, but also on the mental well-being side. You speak of the younger generation and the time that they spent on screens. This is having a devastating impact. And it's, as you say, directly linked to the crisis, the emergency we have with half of the younger generation in Europe facing issues of anxiety, depression, loneliness, and these mental challenges. Now you mentioned the figure of investment that we've made through Erasmus Plus in this budgetary period for contribution towards sports, a little bit more than €350,000,000.
And I agree, we need to make more. This is why the proposal for the next Erasmus Plus includes even more financial commitment from the European Union. But I want to add to this because we don't stop there. We don't stop at the financial contribution and the financial investment in sports to Rasmus. Plus, I want to mention the campaigns we organize with member states on an annual basis: the Be Active campaign, the European Week of Sport to encourage physical activity, but also support for member states to invest in infrastructure that encourages people to engage in physical activity on a daily basis. And I want to give a concrete example.
I come here to this dialogue from Plenica, Slovenia. The biggest investment in ski jumping, in infrastructure related to street ski jumping in Europe, is supported by European funding. If you look around in Slovenia, I mentioned this because this is where I just came from, there is infrastructure encouraging pedestrians, pedestrian spaces for people to be able to move, cycling paths, and public infrastructure for sport. These are the kinds of projects that we want to support member states in delivering, also through the support of European funds. So I completely agree that we have to support and encourage this much more, also with the support of the European Union.
And there are other examples that I am sure you're familiar with from different member states. When it comes to cyberbullying, the action plan, and the issue of age verification, the white label application is being piloted as we speak in six member states. This is linked to the digital identity wallet. I know that France and Italy are among those two member states. And, hopefully, this will set us up to employ a wider instrument that reaches even more member states.
On the piracy of sports events, the commission has just published its assessment of the implementation of the recommendation that was adopted in 2023. And I think it's quite clear and outlined in this recommendation that there is still a lot of work to do and that this was not as effective as we hoped it would be in addressing the issue of piracy of live sports events. The estimates that I've seen from the EU Intellectual Property Office from 2021 are that around 900. €90,000,000,000 and €900,000,000 are being lost every year as a result of piracy. This is money that is literally stolen from sports, from the development of youth infrastructure, from the development of grassroots sport, and from our communities.
So, there, I hope that we move beyond dynamic injunctions. We move beyond what is in the recommendation and have something stronger to combat this issue, in parallel to the work we do to improve the legal offers for people to be able to access sport. I want to also address the question on the youth check because the youth check is something which we've started implementing from the last commission work program. It's a tool designed to help us systematically analyze and look into all the major initiatives adopted in the commission work program every year. And when we assess them, if there is a significantly disproportionate impact on youth, we have further consultations.
We have specific impact assessments focusing on youth, and we want to make sure that we implement this to reach as many people as possible. In some cases, we've even gone beyond the major initiatives, and I'll give you one example here. Two examples, actually. The Culture Compass for Europe is one of the initiatives where we've implemented a U-check, even though this was not one of the major initiatives outlined in the Commission work program and the cyberbullying action plan, which we are talking about today. And with this, I want to mention the issue raised in relation to parents and the worry they face when dealing with children and their activity in online spaces.
In my experience, parents are the most anxious. They feel helpless because they desire more information about how to react to what's going on in the digital spaces. And this is something that we try to cover through education and building digital literacy across our societies, not just focusing on younger people. Digital literacy remains the key for this.
Thank you.
Nela Riehl
You. Now we're coming to the next round of coordinators. So firstly, we don't see anyone here from Renew, Greens, or ESN, but we do have Miss Muratje from the Left. And then we will have the catch-the-eye afterwards. You have 3 minutes.
Thing?
We will.
Speaker 16
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think that for too many people, doing sport is putting on certain clothes and just going for a run, but that's not what sports are about. Sports is a universal language that builds bridges, not walls. Sports have values. And for those of us who have engaged seriously in sport, where it's been our life, we know about this.
Speaker 17
It's about inclusion. It's about integration and respect. But it's not only about respecting your own limits; it's also about respecting rivals, if you like. Those that you're playing against aren't people you have to trample. The other person, your rival, is the person who gives you value and helps you grow.
And that is why I don't think sport should ever be used as a political tool. It has to be used to promote peace and inclusion, and this is how we grew up. That's what sport is about. There are 57 conflicts or wars in the world. So, what are we going to do?
Are we going to decide which wars are fair and which wars are not? I think participation is key. But if we ban some, then look. 57 conflicts. There is a genocide going on.
Then, we also have the United States. The United States abducted a president, a dictator—call him what you want—but the president of a sovereign country. So, when I hear this and see sports being used as a weapon, I feel extremely upset. This is distressing because sport is a tool for peace, as there are no other tools. Diplomacy isn't dead.
So the world of sport isn't immune to violence or abuse, especially against young people and women. And I think that the EU should assess the introduction of a compulsory certification system for those who train with or train young people in sport. We do have a good practice in Australia called Working with Children Check. This is a checking system that checks the background of those who work with young people through in-depth checks of their criminal record and any other relevant information. I had other questions to put to you, but I got a bit carried away in the first part of my comments.
It took me a little longer. But I'm wondering whether we could have a system in the EU that protects young people from adults—adults who enter the world of sport for reasons other than sports, so kind of for unlawful reasons. Thank you.
Thank you.
Speaker 18
Now we have the Catch the Eye round. So, the members have one minute. So, Manuela is from the EPP. Dear Commissioner, I would also like to address a sports team, and this is the Special Olympics. My home region, the Saarland, will host the National Special Olympics in June.
Speaker 19
There'll be, among the 12 participating delegations, Malta. This has societal added value. There are many long-term projects, but unfortunately, these games don't have enough funding. That's why co-financing and support from the EU are necessary. There are many different projects that it could profit from.
And in the future, EU funds could be used, but not only that. We also need more awareness-raising about the importance and added value of the Special Olympics at the national and European levels. That's why my commission to you, commissioner, is: can we continue to count on your support and your financial support? And what more can you do for raising awareness of the Special Olympics? The games take place during a plenary week in Strasbourg.
So it would be really nice if you could come to Saarland and participate in these games. Thank you. That sounds very good. And now we go to the S and D. Thank you.
Speaker 26
Thank you very much, Commissioner. Twenty-five percent of children, you said just a moment ago, have been involved in or have witnessed online bullying. This is harrowing. It's an emergency, and we have to act immediately. The action plan is a necessary step.
Speaker 25
I was quite impressed by how you described this. But whether this succeeds or not will depend on the platform's reaction. It's not enough just to remove harmful content once a tragedy has occurred. And it's not even about banning the content for younger people. I'm not saying it's not good, but it's not enough.
Speaker 22
We have to look at the root causes, the architecture of digital environments, and those algorithms that, in order to rake in profits, just promote conflict instead of protecting the users. If we are to have an efficient plan, how are we going to oblige the platforms to ban the spread of harmful content before it harms teenagers? And if we report these, how are we going to have a swift reaction? That has to be taken down within minutes, not within hours or days. We can only judge the plan based on specific results.
Thank you.
Speaker 24
You. Thank you very much. Congratulations, Commissioner. I heard you in plenary when you unveiled this key plan. There are three main planks.
First of all, more stringent rules for social media, media literacy and skills in schools, and fighting against abuse. We can see that this is a social emergency, an education emergency, and that the problems are structural. I come from Italy. In 2025, 68 percent of children from 11 to 19 were victims of online bullying. I come from Calabria, and we know how important sport is.
Sport, I think, is a wonderful tool to empower our children. It helps with their self-esteem and helps them become strong. Now, social media depersonalizes young people. It affects their cognitive functions. They become truly absorbed in this online world.
So it's extremely important to bring them back to the real world. In Calabria, the sports infrastructure is crumbling, and that's why we feel very strongly about the investment in sports infrastructure. And you mentioned this. This is extremely important so that, through sport and by meeting other young people, they can regain their self-esteem. Thank you.
Speaker 28
Thank you very much, Commissioner Mikhailov, for coming this afternoon and for explaining the priorities in the cyberbullying action plan. And thank you very much for talking about media literacy and digital education this afternoon. As you know, we're working on a report on media and digital literacy, and the fight against cyberbullying is inextricably linked to it. It's very much about how the digital environment is designed, how we can deal with harmful content, and how we can give the right tools and skills to young people so that they feel empowered. And media literacy is part and parcel of a preventive approach.
Speaker 31
It's not just about acting when the harm has been done. We have to act upstream, and the information has to reach families, teachers, educators, children, and the whole IT ecosystem. I'm wondering whether you think that a median digital literacy plan is key to contributing to the plan you just unveiled to fight against cyberbullying. Now, on sports, two brief questions. A lot is happening in basketball.
Speaker 27
The NBA is very interested in the EuroLeague. And do you think that our competition model, the European sport competition model that was adopted here in the European Parliament, is being called into question? And then I would like to ask a question about the piracy of sporting events. So, I'm wondering what you're going to do in order to beef up the fight against piracy. Thank you.
Thank you.
Nela Riehl
Thank you very much for all of these questions. Commissioner, you have the floor. No. One more. Mister Vysheck, one comment.
Thank you.
Speaker 30
You. Mister Mikhailov, last week, I was in London as part of a mission of the court committee. And we met with representatives of the government, parliament, academia, and the creative industries. We heard very clearly that there is the political will to cooperate, but there are certain practical hitches. In the area of touring artists, the issues are very systemic: visas, permits to get employment, the 90, 180 days rule, cabotage, carnets for their instruments. For small institutions, this makes life difficult.
And for smaller companies, this may be fatal. As a person who has more than 30 years of experience in music, showbiz, and TV, I know that this is not an abstract issue. It is a very real issue for real people, real productions, and real audiences. So, we instead insist on finding some working solutions, perhaps some kind of special derogation in the area of cultural exchanges. Do we have the will to start such a debate?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Nela Riehl
Thank you very much. Yes. It took a little while for the interpreter to finish. Let's give the floor now to Glenn, the commissioner.
Glenn Micallef
I'll try to answer all points, but I'll start with the one on the United Kingdom because the European Commission has never closed the door to the United Kingdom, neither on culture nor on sports. So, Creative Europe and Erasmus Plus remain open with possibilities for the United Kingdom. I think our willingness has never been put into question. We stand ready to work together with the United Kingdom, but they have to choose to engage. So, if they choose to engage, our doors are open.
Youth and cultural exchanges are mutually beneficial for both sides, and that's the spirit of cooperation which we see as still being firmly in place. Other elements in relation to touring artists are part of a wider discussion on the relationship between the EU and the UK in the areas of transport, customs, and visas, for example. But if the UK wants to engage on this, we are open to having a conversation. Why not? Now on the MBA, and I'll merit even a discussion on its own as a topic.
I am monitoring the developments in the discussions related to European basketball in general because there are wider structural issues in European basketball, not just related to the NBA. What I will tell you is this: the only thing worse than a European closed league in basketball is having two closed leagues in basketball. So, we need to have a little bit of reflection on this. I want to keep my doors open to dialogue, to engagement, to try and find a solution on this. But for me, one key principle continues to be fundamental and to be the answer to the challenges that European basketball faces, and that is the European sport model with its pyramidal system.
So that is clear. Then, on sport more broadly and in general, I just came back from the Olympic Games. And the Olympic Games have been, as I said, a wonderful celebration of sporting excellence, friendship, inclusion, peace, and solidarity. So this is undoubted on this. I think we are like-minded.
Just to make sure that I am very clear on what I've said in my introductory statements. I am not advocating for bans based on nationality, bans that go against sporting merit, or discriminating against anyone based just on the nationality they hold or the passport. But there is also a public safety and public security issue that we need to reflect on when it comes to displaying symbols of aggressors in member states. And this is something that worries me, but also worries public policymakers across the board. And then, Special Olympics has a very special place in my heart as well.
This is an organization that literally saves lives. Their impact goes far beyond sports. They're helping people and athletes to be active in society, to live healthier lives, and to make meaningful contributions to society. I'm happy that we've been able, as the European Union, to support Special Olympics. And if there are ways that we could continue to support them, you know that I'm going to be one of the people who pushes this in our work.
On the compliance of digital platforms and their contribution to our work on combating cyberbullying, I think digital platforms need to be seen as people with whom we work in this situation. We have tools at our disposal, and I mentioned earlier in my opening remarks the legal framework that we have in place, the Digital Services Act, under which we will further update binding guidelines on these platforms as to what we expect in relation to the protection of minors and vulnerable citizens in digital spaces. And this is something which we will do, even this year, updating guidelines which we've adopted for 2025, giving clear instructions and clear parameters for these platforms. Then, on media and digital literacy, Marcos mentioned the importance of embedding this even further than it is among our citizens. And I think one of the key contributions here and one of the key suggestions would be to have digital skills as part of the basic competencies, the basic skills that young people learn in our education systems.
This is as important as math and language subjects, and it is one of the core competencies that people should be taught in education systems. There was a question in the earlier round on Agora EU, which I forgot to address in my earlier remarks. And this is about cultural diversity and inclusion through European funding. Agora EU, and I speak specifically here for the Creative Europe's trend, takes pride in the fact that we will be celebrating cultural diversity, different identities, different traditions, providing mobility opportunities for cultural professionals and artists to be able to move across borders, celebrating European literature, and celebrating European architecture coming from many member states and even beyond member states in some cases. So this is something which we look forward to strengthening in the next programming period and in the next budget.
Well,
Nela Riehl
We're really pleased to hear that. Thank you very much for answering all of those questions, and thank you for having this exchange with everyone here today. Let me just remind everyone that I was invited to the Paralympics. I really look forward to supporting our athletes, but I will also choose not to attend the opening ceremony for the same reasons. Thank you very much for coming here today.
We've had a very lively conversation. We look forward to seeing you here again, and we appreciate the close cooperation that we have with you. We hope that you have a good evening. We're going to stay on for a little longer.
Speaker 32
One minute. I'll just say goodbye. We will move on to the next item on the agenda. Please take your seats or leave the room if you cannot stay. Folks over there, please leave the room and don't use this room for your chats.
I mean, you take a shed outside.
Nela Riehl
The last item on our agenda is the presentation of the study on EU financing instruments for political spheres that fall under the competence of the CULT committee. So, this study looks at how, under the current programming period, EU funding has been used in fields that pertain to the CULT Committee's responsibilities. So the five topical areas are culture, the creative sector, information, media policy, education, youth, and sport. So, I would like to welcome François Levalet and Ariana Mori from T33 Consultancy, who are going to present the main findings of the study. You have 10 to 12 minutes for your speaking time.
Speaker 34
Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you very much for the introduction. Okay. As mentioned in the introduction, our study had a scope that included all five thematic fields. And in particular, for the 2017 programming period, it carried out a review of 22 EU funding instruments.
Speaker 33
This included the four key card instruments, the cohesion policy funds, CAP funds, other shared management funds, some sectoral programs such as Digital Europe and Horizon Europe, and some smaller initiatives such as European bonds and the European public sphere.
Speaker 36
In the 2027 programming period, thematic fields related to culture, media, education, youth, and sports are addressed in many different programs. However, the way in which these fields are addressed varies considerably depending on the objective of the instruments, whether there is direct or indirect coverage, depending on the management mode—direct, indirect, or shared management—and depending on the budget size. We have large funds like EZF Plus versus very small funds like pilot projects and preparatory actions programs. It also depends on the type of investments. Infrastructure includes finance projects, innovation projects, capacity building, as well as training, networking, and equipment. The instruments that directly contribute to cards with 100% funding are the European Solidarity Corps, Erasmus Plus, Creative Europe, and the Citizen Equality Rights and Values programs.
Speaker 35
These instruments are highly relevant in terms of addressing social and regional inequalities, gender gaps, disadvantaged groups, and young creators. They are also very relevant in terms of skills mismatch, gaps between education and market skills in the context of digital and green transitions, and because of the underfunding in the cultural and creative sector. Recurring challenges, however, include the fact that demand for all these funds far exceeds available resources, four times for Erasmus, with many high-quality projects remaining unfunded. Next slide. For the 2021-2027 programming period, KULT relevant funds at 100% represent less than 3% of the MFF, while other programs with a broader scope represent 8% of the budget. Significant weight is given to CALT by ECF Plus and education and training, but also by ERDF funds, European Regional Development Funds, through investment in cultural heritage.
Speaker 36
Next slide. The cultural and creative sector, as well as education, are the areas most covered by instruments since 2021-2027 multi-annual financial program, while youth and sports are less represented. This results in higher fragmentation within these sectors. This fragmentation is evident in terms of management modes, supported actions, and types of investments. This, of course, requires synergies and complementarities, which are not always present in practice.
Speaker 35
For example, at the national level, when it comes to the coordination between Erasmus and EZF Plus. Erasmus Plus EZF Plus.
Speaker 33
Turning to the 2014-2020 programming period, the proposal presented by the commission places a higher focus on flexibility and simplification. And in such a context, the main change that affected the CALS instrument is, of course, the integration of these programs. One of the risks identified from the study is that there is a possibility that these current programs can lose identity and visibility. This is particularly true for Creative Europe and SERP, which will be merged under a brand new label. Another risk that we identified is the fact that smaller initiatives may struggle to retain dedicated resources.
And here, a suitable example can be the European Solidarity Corps, which will be absorbed under the larger framework of Erasmus, Erasmus Plus. And finally, in such a merged structure, smaller beneficiaries may face increased competition from larger entities, making access to these funds more demanding for them rather than simplified. This drive towards simplification was also reflected in the structures that were proposed for these programs. Indeed, the structure seems streamlined compared to that of the current programming period and less detailed. Such a structure entails similar risks to those we listed for the integration, like the loss of visibility for some specific sectors such as youth sport volunteering.
Furthermore, the less detailed description of the eligible actions in the regulations may limit core legislator oversight and reduce planning certainty. We are here particularly referring to Annex 1 of the regulation, the Creative Europe regulation. In such a general, more generic regulation where clear interventions are not provided, there could be the possibility that the scope of the program is perceived as broadened. And in addition to this, since unclear interventions are listed. In addition to this, the new regulation also provides for new typologies of interventions to be funded under these programs, such as the sectoral scholarship under ASMUS Plus or a specific objective dedicated to news under Agora EU.
And in such a framework, it is important that the program mandates are not overstretched. So a proportional additional budget should be provided. Linked to the flexibility matter, one change that has been introduced is that the proposed regulation does not include the earmarked budget as the current ones. This entails some risk for the predictability of investments, meaning that if pre-allocated funds are not already established in the regulation, it will be more difficult to ensure long-term financial support for the treatment of some strategic objectives. This can also affect the oversight of the coal legislators on these budgetary procedures and also affect the inclusiveness of the programs.
In such a scenario, the annual work programs gain a lot of importance since they are the unique tool that can be used for the allocation of budget among objectives, priorities, and actions. However, from the proposed regulation, it seems that the procedure for the adoption of these annual work programs has been weakened in terms of transparency. This is because the annual work programs in the proposed regulation will be adopted as a financing decision instead of an implementing act. So they won't be subject to the comitology procedure, weakening the Parliament's oversight over the work of the Commission. And finally, concerning the budgetary matter, our study revealed that a budgetary increase is foreseen for all the key CALS instruments, confirming the importance of these teams for the European Union.
However, while doing this analysis, two caveats emerged. The first is that nominal increases in funding may be limited in real terms after inflation is considered. This is because the 2% deflator rate considered by the commission is lower than the actual inflation rate in recent years. And the second element that should be considered is the integration effects. The programs, after the integration and considering also these potential broadened scopes, can have a wider area of intervention.
So, they might need more funding.
Speaker 36
The study recommends first providing more funding for the cultmatic field in order to address the high level of demand expressed and considering the added value of the yearly funding. The study also recommends clarifying the intervention logic for each current priority. This involves establishing the connections between needs, financial allocations, priorities, actions, output, and results. There should also be a clear financial remark for each priority. For Erasmus+ 2021-2027, there is an indicative allocation by teams and sub-teams, whereas the draft proposal for 2028-2034 only provides for two budget lines.
Speaker 35
The study also recommends that the share management program should include details about the current related actions in the NRPP plants, for example, providing clear selection criteria in terms of targeted sectors, technologies, target groups, and a clear design for monitoring and reporting, which illustrates the regular state of the art of the implementation. The study also recommends considering the limited number of programs and plans, as there is an opportunity to better define the synergy and complementarities between the different financial instruments in practical terms through higher coordination, joint tendering processes, and partnerships. Last but not least, the recommendation is to increase transparency in the new system. We propose a tracking expenditure system for calculated interventions, similar to the environmental and telematic tracking system. This would involve identifying the relevant intervention field for CALTs. There are 14 draft proposal regulations.
And by applying a three-tier weighting system, very similar to the one used for tracking climate and environmental expenditure. The weighting system is still 14 and 120, depending on the cut contributions. Thank you very much.
Nela Riehl
Thank you for the presentation. And we're coming to the round of coordinators. It's a little smaller now. So, we'll begin with Mr. Hader. Thank you.
Speaker 7
I feel very privileged. I'd like to thank them for this very comprehensive study. The question that I'd like to ask is: are we better off in this than in the previous MFFs? What do we have to do to make sure that cultural agents will have a better position in future MFFs? And that's why I would like to quote a Court of Audits report from the year 2020 that talks about the EU and investments in cultural areas.
It said the strategic framework for culture in the EU has problems. There is mainstreaming in different areas, and it is being used for other priorities. It also indicates that a higher potential for promoting the cultural sector could occur if this were on the commission agenda, and there were questions about improving the strategic framework for culture in other areas. There are also questions about the implementation of these goals. A measured coordination within the commission was called for.
So I ask, December 2020 was the time limit for the implementation, and I wonder whether that was actually implemented. In general, the need for these funds is growing because the pressure on public budgets is increasing. And with EU funds, they are trying to find a balance. The earmarking is essential; it involves many different sectors. What I'd also like to point out is that we have existing frameworks, and we should continue to keep them.
And Agora EU cannot just be the heart, and with a term like Creative Europe, European Celta D Corp should also be kept as a brand. This is something I called for that we have in the negotiation for the MFF, but I'd also like to say thanks because this is a basis for many things for the future of culture, sport, and many other areas. Thank you for your work. Thank you. And now, Miss Maraca.
Thank you.
Speaker 17
Thank you for this study, which has real political weight. Now, we establish the remit of the cult, and we talk about its visibility. At the moment, only 3% of citizens benefit from this. So, we're working under the European flag. We're looking at citizenship, cohesion, and skills.
And every year, we keep being asked to make better use of the resources that are available. We're not dealing with a technical problem. We're dealing with a political problem. Therefore, I think that, as the COLT committee, we should have three clear priorities. The ambition in relation to the balance sheet is that we've got Erasmus Plus and Agora EU.
We're actually going to get less than we might think. There are excellent projects that are not being funded. Therefore, we have to question whether the resources being proposed are enough to address the difference between supply and demand. And then, there's the question of accessibility. Despite all the efforts to simplify, the administrative burden remains high.
We need to have genuinely inclusive programs, which means that they need to be accessible to small organizations, including local organizations and new beneficiaries, avoiding a concentration of resources in the hands of large professional organizations. And thirdly, and lastly, the protection of what is awarded in terms of money. So, there needs to be some kind of predictability, but we shouldn't just have one large bucket, whether it's education, media, or sport. There's a certain sense of rivalry between these different domains, so we need to be very clear and transparent in our allocation of funding. Thank you.
Proceed with renewal.
Speaker 37
Sometimes, timing is everything. It's a bit of a rushed day. I can imagine you also had one. But my question is this: the analysis clearly highlights that the growing role of Erasmus Plus within the European Union of Skills is vital, but it also shows that there is persistent inequality in participation between higher education and vocational education. And I was wondering, in your view, which concrete budgetary and governance reforms in the next MFF could be necessary to ensure that mobility opportunities for VET students not only grow proportionally but also become structurally accessible to young people with fewer opportunities?
And how could the EU better align Erasmus Plus with national and regional labor market and skill strategies to maximize this impact?
Vian Dang.
Nela Riehl
Yeah. Thank you. Mister, the presenters have five minutes to answer the questions. Thank you.
Speaker 36
Thank you very much. So, we clearly support the increase of funds for the CAL thematic related fields. We also support reinforcing and strengthening the synergy. We can get the opportunity of the NRPP, national programs. We will limit and reduce the number of managing authorities de facto with this big NRTP.
And so, we can get this opportunity to increase coordination in the spending of the funds. We can get the opportunities to launch joint tenders and calls for proposals. We can get the opportunity, and the commission can get the opportunity to improve monitoring and reporting in the field related to Temaki. So I guess these are important initiatives that can be taken over by the commissions, and it's important to apply them. We also advocate for a clear logic of intervention.
So it's very important because, in the current EU policy programs like ERDF and ESF, very often, we don't know exactly where the money is going for the culture-related field. For example, the intervention fields for the innovative projects are not clear or are not able to give us information about whether or not the systematic relative fields have been financed. So the estimation we propose in this study, anyway, tries to provide you with some estimations. But of course, increasing the clarity of the intervention logic would help to understand it. And this would also support giving more transparency and provide more elements for parliaments to understand where the money is going.
Concerning the equity proof, it's through the points I mentioned before. Giving a clear understanding of where the money is going. It's a very critical point. Provide a clear logic of interventions, which means that we define the budgets, identify the actions, provide outputs and result indicators within the programs, so that we can clearly understand the impacts. And at the end of the implementation of this program.
So, of course, this is one of the points which was really highlighted in the exposed evaluations and midterm evaluations of Erasmus: this gap between vocational education financing and opportunities opened for vocational education and higher education was applied. So yes, it's mainly through these two points: increasing the budget, the logic of interventions, and clarity that we can improve the landscape.
Nela Riehl
Thank you. Thank you for your presentation. Also, thank you to the colleagues who asked questions. The study will be very important for our work here. So, thank you for giving us answers today.
We are sitting a little bit earlier than we thought. We don't have any other points. The next session will take place on March 5 from 9:00 to 9:30. I will not be able to take part in person because I have an informal meeting with the culture minister in Cyprus. Then, let's conclude our sitting today.
Thank you to all of the interpreters, and I wish you all a very nice evening.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.