REPORT on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Union action for the European Capitals of Culture for the years 2020 to 2033
19.6.2013 - (COM(2012)0407 – C7‑0198/2012 – 2012/0199(COD)) - ***I
Committee on Culture and Education
Rapporteur: Marco Scurria
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Union action for the European Capitals of Culture for the years 2020 to 2033
(COM(2012)0407 – C7‑0198/2012 – 2012/0199(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2012)0407),
– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 167(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0198/2012),
– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
– having regard to the opinions of the Committee of the Regions of 15 February 2012[1] and 30 November 2012[2],
– having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education (A7-0226/2013),
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;
2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;
3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.
Amendment 1 Proposal for a decision Recital 2 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(2) The Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a European agenda for culture in a globalizing world, endorsed by the Council in Resolution of 16 November 2007 on a European Agenda for Culture sets the objectives for future activities of the Union in the field of culture. These activities should promote cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue. They should also promote culture as a catalyst for creativity within the framework of growth and jobs, as well as a vital element in the Union's international relations. |
(2) The Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a European agenda for culture in a globalising world, endorsed by the European Parliament in its resolution of 10 April 20081 and by the Council in its resolution of 16 November 2007 on a European Agenda for Culture, sets the objectives for future activities of the Union in the field of culture. Those activities should promote cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue. They should also promote culture as a catalyst for creativity within the framework of growth and jobs and as a social bridge-builder, as well as a vital element in the Union's international relations. |
|
|
____________ |
|
|
1OJ C 247 E, 15.10.2009, p. 32. |
Amendment 2 Proposal for a decision Recital 2 a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(2a) The UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, which entered into force on 18 March 2007 and to which the Union is a party, aims at promoting respect for the diversity of cultural expressions and at raising awareness of its value at local, national and international levels. |
Amendment 3 Proposal for a decision Recital 5 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(5) In addition to the original objectives of the European Capitals of Culture which were to highlight the richness and diversity of European cultures and the features they share and to promote greater mutual understanding between European citizens, cities holding the title have also progressively added a new dimension by using the leverage effect of the title to stimulate the city's more general development. |
(5) In addition to the original objectives of the European Capitals of Culture, which were to highlight the richness and diversity of European cultures and the features they share and to promote greater mutual understanding and solidarity between European citizens, cities holding the title have also progressively added a new dimension by using the leverage effect of the title to stimulate the city's more general development, not least where urban development is concerned. |
Amendment 4 Proposal for a decision Recital 6 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(6) These objectives are fully in line with the objectives of the Creative Europe Programme which aims to promote European cultural and linguistic diversity and to strengthen the competitiveness of the cultural and creative sectors, with a view to supporting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. |
(6) Those objectives are fully in line with the objectives of the Creative Europe Programme, the aims of which are to safeguard and promote European cultural and linguistic diversity, safeguard and enhance Europe's cultural heritage and strengthen the competitiveness of the cultural and creative sectors, with a view to supporting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. As stated in the European Parliament's resolution of 27 September 2011 on Europe, the world's No 1 tourist destination – a new political framework for tourism in Europe1, the European tourism sector in particular can benefit from the Capital of Culture programme and make a strong contribution to sustainable growth. |
|
|
_______________ |
|
|
1 OJ C 56 E, 26.2.2013, p. 41. |
Amendment 5 Proposal for a decision Recital 7 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(7) The evaluations and the public consultation have demonstrated that the European Capitals of Culture have many potential benefits when they are planned with consideration. They remain first and foremost a cultural initiative, but they can also have significant social and economic benefits, particularly when they are embedded as part of a long-term culture led development strategy in the city. |
(7) The evaluations and the public consultation have convincingly shown that the European Capitals of Culture hold many potential benefits when they are carefully planned. They remain first and foremost a cultural initiative, but they can also bring significant social and economic benefits, particularly when they are embedded within a long-term culture-led development strategy in the city. |
Amendment 6 Proposal for a decision Recital 8 a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(8a) The European Capitals of Culture should promote social inclusion and equal opportunities and do their utmost to ensure the broadest possible involvement of all sectors, communities, social groups – with special focus on disadvantaged groups and people with disabilities – and age groups within civil society in the preparation and implementation of the cultural programme, placing special emphasis on volunteering. |
Amendment 7 Proposal for a decision Recital 9 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(9) The European Capital of Culture title should continue to be reserved to cities, but in order to reach a wider public and amplify the impacts, these cities should also continue to have the possibility to involve their surrounding region. |
(9) The European Capital of Culture title should continue to be reserved to cities, irrespective of their size, but in order to reach a wider public and amplify the impacts and make a significant contribution to achieving the programme's objectives, those cities should also continue to be allowed to involve their rural, neighbouring and cross-border areas whose participation can highlight the historical and cultural affinities between Member States. |
Amendment 8 Proposal for a decision Recital 9 a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(9a) This cultural action should be pursued in collaboration with young people so as to develop their critical faculties and help them become more self-reliant, without neglecting the need for sharing. It is essential to recognise the cultures embodied in youth if these are to be integrated within society. |
Amendment 9 Proposal for a decision Recital 10 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(10) The award of the title of European Capital of Culture should continue to be based on a cultural programme created specifically for the European Capital of Culture year and which should have a very strong European dimension, but this programme must be part of a longer-term strategy. |
(10) The award of the title of European Capital of Culture should continue to be based on a cultural programme created specifically for the European Capital of Culture, and should have a strong European dimension focused on the use of the Union's policies and programmes and based on current European themes and European issues with broad social impact. That programme must be part of a longer-term strategy, with sustainable effects for local economic and social development. |
Justification | |
The European dimension is a unique and very important element of this Union action which has to be further strengthened. | |
Amendment 10 Proposal for a decision Recital 11 a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(11a) National expertise should be ensured by allowing the relevant Member States to nominate two consultative members to the panel. |
Amendment 11 Proposal for a decision Recital 12 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(12) The selection criteria should be more explicit in order to give more guidance to the candidate cities and more measurable in order to help the panel of experts in the selection and monitoring of cities. They should in particular reinforce the legacy of the title by rewarding cities which have developed a long-term cultural policy strategy. |
(12) The selection criteria should be made more explicit in order to afford more guidance to the candidate cities on the aims and requirements involved in the title of European Capital of Culture, and more measurable in order to help the panel of experts in the selection and monitoring of cities. The criteria should in particular reinforce the legacy of the title by rewarding cities which have developed a long-term cultural policy strategy, which can generate sustainable effects in terms of economic and social growth, and which have been actively involved with Union projects. |
Justification | |
See justification for amendment to Recital 10. | |
Amendment 12 Proposal for a decision Recital 13 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(13) The preparation phase between the designation of a city and the year of the title is of crucial importance for the success of a European Capital of Culture. There is a large consensus among stakeholders that the accompanying measures introduced by Decision N° 1622/2006/EC have been very useful for the cities. These measures should be further developed in particular through more frequent monitoring meetings and visits to the cities by panel members, and through an even stronger exchange of experience between past, present and future Capitals, as well as candidate cities. |
(13) The preparation phase between the designation of a city and the year of the title is of crucial importance for the success of a European Capital of Culture. There is broad consensus among stakeholders that the accompanying measures introduced by Decision No 1622/2006/EC have been very useful for the cities. Those measures should be further developed, in particular through more frequent monitoring meetings and visits to the cities by panel members, and through an even stronger exchange of experience between past, present and future Capitals, as well as candidate cities, especially by using the already established formal and informal networks of European Capitals of Culture. |
Amendment 13 Proposal for a decision Recital 14 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(14) The Melina Mercouri Prize has acquired a strong symbolic value which goes far beyond the actual amount of the prize which may be awarded by the Commission. However, in order to ensure that the designated cities fulfil their commitments, the conditions for payment of the prize should be made more stringent and explicit. |
(14) The Melina Mercouri Prize has acquired a strong symbolic value which goes far beyond the actual amount of the prize which may be awarded by the Commission. However, in order to ensure that the designated cities fulfil their commitments, the conditions for payment of the prize should be made more stringent and explicit, taking account of, inter alia, economic, political and social circumstances. |
Amendment 14 Proposal for a decision Recital 14 a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(14a) The Commission should encourage candidate cities to make full use of other potential sources of financial support from the Union, such as the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund. |
Amendment 15 Proposal for a decision Recital 17 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(17) The experience of Sibiu 2007 and Istanbul 2010, among others, has shown that the participation of candidate countries can contribute to bring them closer to the Union by highlighting the common aspects of European cultures. The European Capitals of Culture should therefore be open again to the participation of candidate and potential candidate countries after 2019. |
(17) Past experience has shown that the participation of candidate countries can help to bring them closer to the Union by highlighting the common aspects of European cultures. The European Capitals of Culture should therefore be open again to the participation of candidate and potential candidate countries after 2019. |
Amendment 16 Proposal for a decision Recital 17 a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(17a) Regarding candidate countries' and potential candidate countries' cities, the individual elements of the candidacy should be consistent with the Union's acquis and with respect for the cultural and historical features of the Union. |
Amendment 17 Proposal for a decision Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(a) to safeguard and promote the diversity of European cultures, and to highlight the common features they share; |
(a) to safeguard and promote the diversity of European cultures, highlight the common features they share and encourage European identity;
|
Amendment 18 Proposal for a decision Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(a) to enhance the range, diversity and European dimension of the cultural offer in cities, including through transnational co-operation; |
(a) to enhance the range, diversity and European dimension of the cultural offering in cities, including through transnational cooperation and intercultural dialogue; |
Amendment 19 Proposal for a decision Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(c) to strengthen the capacity of the cultural sector and its connectivity with other sectors; |
(c) to strengthen the capacity of the cultural sector and its links with regional and local authorities and with other sectors, such as those concerned with education, scientific research, the environment, creative industries, urban renewal and cultural tourism, and all of those which promote the cultural potential of cities; |
Amendment 20 Proposal for a decision Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(d) to improve the international profile of cities through culture. |
(d) to raise the international profile of cities through culture; |
Amendment 21 Proposal for a decision Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(da) to boost the involvement of residents and include excluded groups. |
Amendment 22 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
The designation shall apply to a maximum of one city in each of the Member States appearing in the list. |
The designation shall apply to, at most, one city in each of the Member States appearing in the list. The number of European Capitals of Culture in a given year shall not exceed three. |
Justification | |
This aspect has to be part of the Articles, not only in the footnote in the Annex. | |
Amendment 23 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
2. Where a country accedes to the Union after the adoption of the present Decision, the list referred to in the annex shall be updated accordingly. Thus the cities in this country shall be entitled to be designated as European Capitals of Culture according to the same rules and procedures as for other Member States. |
2. Where a country accedes to the Union after the adoption of this Decision, the list set out in the Annex shall be updated accordingly. Thus the cities in that country shall be entitled to be designated as European Capitals of Culture in accordance with the same rules and procedures as for other Member States. The order of accession of countries shall be respected. If two or more countries accede to the Union at the same date and if no agreement on the order of participation can be reached between the countries concerned, the Council shall organise a draw. |
Justification | |
See justification for amendment to Article 3.1.2. | |
Amendment 24 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
However, as the competition for the title shall start six years before the beginning of the year of the title in order to give the cities sufficient time for their preparation after their designation, the list shall not be updated in the case of countries acceding to the Union after 31 December 2026. |
However, as the competition for the title is to start at least six years before the beginning of the year of the title in order to give the cities sufficient time for their preparation after their designation, the list shall not be updated in the case of countries acceding to the Union after 31 December 2026. |
Justification | |
See justification for amendment to Article 3.1.2. | |
Amendment 25 Proposal for a decision Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
3. Cities in candidate and potential candidate countries shall also have the possibility to apply for the European Capital of Culture title in the framework of an open competition organised every third year in parallel with the competitions in the two Member States, in accordance with the calendar in the annex. |
3. It shall also be open to cities in candidate and potential candidate countries to apply for the European Capital of Culture title within the framework of an open competition organised every third year in parallel with the competitions in the two Member States, in accordance with the calendar set out in the Annex. |
Amendment 26 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
1. The competition for the European Capital of Culture title shall only be open to cities. Candidate cities may involve their surrounding regions. However, the applications shall be made under the name of the leading city and, if selected, the title will be awarded to this city. |
1. The competition for the European Capital of Culture title shall only be open to cities. Candidate cities of all sizes may involve their surrounding areas, including those in countries adjacent to them, in cooperation with local and regional authorities. However, the application shall be made under the name of the leading city and, if that city is selected, the title shall be awarded to that city. |
Amendment 27 Proposal for a decision Article 4 – paragraph 3 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
3. Every application shall be based on a cultural programme with a strong European dimension. This programme shall last one year and shall be created specifically for the European Capital of Culture title, in accordance with the criteria in Article 5. It must however be embedded in a long term strategy for cultural development in the city. |
3. Every application shall be based on a cultural programme with a strong European dimension. That programme shall last for the year during which the city in question holds the title of European Capital of Culture and shall be presented specifically for the title of European Capital of Culture, in accordance with the criteria laid down in Article 5. It shall however be embedded in a long-term strategy as an active legacy for cultural development in the city in question, aimed at securing the widest possible involvement of residents, not least the most vulnerable, so as to place access to, and participation in, culture on a footing extending to all. |
Amendment 28 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 1 – point a | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(a) the strategy for the cultural development of the city that is in place at the time of the application, including the plans for cultural governance, and sustaining cultural activities beyond the year of the title; |
(a) the strategy for the cultural development of the city that is in place at the time of the application, including the plans for cultural governance, budgetary support and sustaining cultural activities beyond the year of the title; |
Amendment 29 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 1 – point b | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(b) the plans to strengthen the capacity of the cultural sector; |
(b) the plans to strengthen the capacity of cultural sectors; |
Amendment 30 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 1 – point c | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(c) the plans to strengthen the long term links between the cultural sector and the economic and social sectors in the city; |
(c) the plans to strengthen the long-term links between the cultural sectors, regional and local authorities, voluntary organisations and the social and economic sectors in the city and its surrounding areas; |
Amendment 31 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 1 – point c a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(ca) the strategy for an urban development with lasting results for the city; |
Amendement 32 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 1 – point d | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(d) the envisaged long-term cultural, social and economic effects that the title would have on the city; |
(d) the envisaged long-term effects that the title would have on the city, culturally, socially, economically, and from the point of view of not-for-profit organisations; |
Amendment 33 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 1 – point d a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(da) the impact on the local population, including those who are most vulnerable; |
Amendment 34 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 1 – point d b (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(db) the participation of young people in the joint efforts to pursue this cultural action; |
Amendment 35 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 1 – point e | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(e) the plans for the monitoring and evaluation of the impact of the title on the city. |
(e) the plans for the monitoring and the evaluation of the impact of the title on the city and for disseminating the results of the evaluation. |
Amendment 36 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 2 – point a | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(a) the application has cross-party political support; |
(a) the application has broad cross-party political support and a sustainable financial commitment from the local, regional and national authorities; |
Amendment 37 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 3 – point a | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(a) a clear and coherent artistic vision for the cultural programme of the year; |
(a) a clear and coherent artistic vision and strategy for the cultural programme of the year; |
Amendment 38 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 3 – point b | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(b) the involvement of local artists and cultural organisations in the conception and implementation of the cultural programme; |
(b) the involvement not only of local artists and cultural organisations, but also of residents in the conception and implementation of the cultural programme; |
Amendment 39 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 3 – point c | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(c) the range and diversity of the activities proposed and their overall artistic quality; |
(c) the range, prestige and diversity of the activities proposed and their overall artistic quality; |
Amendment 40 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 4 – point a | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(a) the scope and quality of activities promoting the cultural diversity of Europe; |
(a) the scope, impact and quality of activities promoting the cultural diversity of Europe; |
|
|
(If adopted, the whole Article 5 point 4 as amended is to be moved and placed after Article 5 point 1 to become Article 5 point 2. The rest of the existing points shall be renumbered accordingly.) |
Amendment 41 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 4 – point b | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(b) the scope and quality of activities highlighting the common aspects of European cultures, heritage and history, as well as European integration; |
(b) the scope, impact and quality of activities highlighting the common aspects of European cultures, heritage and history, as well as European integration, based on current European themes and European issues with a broad social impact; |
|
|
(If adopted, the whole Article 5 point 4 as amended is to be moved and placed after Article 5 point 1 to become Article 5 point 2. The rest of the existing points shall be renumbered accordingly.) |
Amendment 42 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 4 – point b a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(ba) plans to integrate and use Union programmes and policies in the programme for the year in order to increase the awareness amongst Union citizens; |
|
|
(If adopted, the whole Article 5 point 4 as amended is to be moved and placed after Article 5 point 1 to become Article 5 point 2. The rest of the existing points shall be renumbered accordingly.) |
Justification | |
The European dimension is a unique and very important element of this Union action which has to be further strengthened. | |
Amendment 43 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 4 – point c | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(c) the scope and quality of activities featuring European artists, co-operation with operators or cities in different countries, and transnational partnerships; |
(c) the scope, impact and quality of activities featuring European artists, cooperation with operators or cities, especially other European Capitals of Culture, in different countries, and transnational partnerships; |
|
|
(If adopted, the whole Article 5 point 4 as amended is to be moved and placed after Article 5 point 1 to become Article 5 point 2. The rest of the existing points shall be renumbered accordingly.) |
Amendment 44 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 4 – point d | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(d) the strategy to attract the interest of a broad European public. |
(d) the strategy to attract the interest of a broad European and international public; |
|
|
(If adopted, the whole Article 5 point 4 as amended is to be moved and placed after Article 5 point 1 to become Article 5 point 2. The rest of the existing points shall be renumbered accordingly.) |
Amendment 45 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 4 – point d a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(da) the inclusion of a plan to increase the cultural influence of Europe in the long term; |
|
|
(If adopted, Article 5 point 4 as amended is to be moved and placed after Article 5 point 1 to become Article point 2. The rest of the points shall be renumbered accordingly.) |
Justification | |
It is important to stress the European Dimension in the long-term strategy as well. | |
Amendment 46 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 4 – point d b (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(db) proposals and ideas for cooperation with the country and/or Member State in which the other Capital of Culture is located to be included in the application, and subsequently pursued. |
|
|
(If adopted, Article 5 point 4 as amended is to be moved and placed after Article 5 point 1 to become Article point 2. The rest of the points shall be renumbered accordingly.) |
Amendment 47 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 5 – point a | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(a) the involvement of the local population and civil society in the preparation of the application and the implementation of the European Capital of Culture; |
(a) the involvement of the local population, especially young people, local organisations and civil society in the preparation of the application and implementation of the European Capital of Culture, with special emphasis on volunteering; |
Amendment 48 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 5 – point c a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(ca) the involvement of the local population in the economic and social activities related to the programme. |
Amendment 49 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 6 – point -a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(-a) partnership with public and private local, regional, and national stakeholders; |
Amendment 50 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 6 – point a | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(a) the feasibility of the proposed budget. This budget shall cover the preparation phase, the year of the title in itself and provisions for the legacy activities; |
(a) the feasibility of the fund-raising strategy and proposed budget, including efficient use of appropriate Union funding. That budget shall cover the preparation phase, the year of the title in itself and provisions for the legacy activities; |
Amendment 51 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 6 – point c | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(c) the appointment procedure of the artistic director and his/her field of action; |
(c) the procedure for the appointment of the general manager and the artistic director and his/her field of action; |
Amendment 52 Proposal for a decision Article 5 – point 6 – point d | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(d) the communication strategy, that shall be comprehensive and shall highlight that the European Capitals of Culture are an initiative of the Union. |
(d) the marketing and communication strategy, which shall be comprehensive and shall highlight the fact that the European Capitals of Culture action is an initiative of the Union. |
Amendment 53 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
2. The European panel shall consist of 10 members. They shall be citizens of the Union. They shall be independent experts with substantial experience and expertise in the cultural sector, in the cultural development of cities or in the organisation of a European Capital of Culture. They shall also be able to devote an appropriate number of working days per year to the European panel. |
2. The European panel shall consist of 10 members selected following the organisation of an open call for expressions of interest. They shall have European citizenship and shall be independent experts with substantial experience and expertise in the fields relevant to the objectives of the action. They shall also be able to devote sufficient time to the European panel. Each of the Member States concerned may nominate two consultative members to the panel. |
Amendment 54 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
The Commission shall pre-select a pool of potential panel members following the organisation of a call for expression of interest. The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission shall subsequently select three experts each from this pool and appoint them in accordance with their respective procedures. The Committee of the Regions shall select one expert and appoint him/her in accordance with its procedures. |
After organising a call for expressions of interest, the Commission shall propose a pool of all potential panel members who expressed their interest and who are deemed to meet the qualification criteria. The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission shall subsequently select three experts each, and the Committee of the Regions one expert, from that pool and appoint them in accordance with their respective procedures. |
Amendment 55 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
Each institution and body shall seek to ensure that the competences of the experts it appoints are as complementary as possible, and that those experts are drawn from a balanced geographical spectrum. |
Each of those institutions and bodies shall seek to ensure complementarity of the areas of competence of the experts it appoints, as well as a balanced geographical distribution and gender balance in the overall composition of the European panel, and to safeguard the continuity of the action. |
Amendment 56 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 3 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
3. The members of the European panel shall be appointed for a period of three years. However, by way of derogation as regards the first panel to be established under the present Decision, the European Parliament shall appoint its three experts for three years, the Council for one year, the Commission for two years and the Committee of the Regions shall appoint its expert for one year in order to enable a staggered replacement of panel members and thus to avoid the loss of experience and know-how which would result if all members were replaced simultaneously. |
3. The members of the European panel shall be appointed for a period of three years. However, for the first panel to be established under this Decision, the European Parliament shall appoint its three experts for three years, the Council for one year and the Commission for two years, and the Committee of the Regions shall appoint its expert for one year. |
Justification | |
This information better fits with the Recitals (see amendment inserting a new Recital 11a). | |
Amendment 57 Proposal for a decision Article 6 – paragraph 4 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
4. The members of the European panel shall declare any actual or potential conflict of interest in respect of a specific candidate city. In the event of such a declaration by a member, or if such a conflict of interest comes to light, that member shall not participate in the selection procedure for the Member State concerned or, where appropriate, in the selection procedure for candidate or potential candidate countries. The member concerned shall not be replaced for this procedure and the selection shall be carried out by the remaining members of the European panel. |
4. The members of the European panel, including the consultative members if appointed by the Member States, shall declare any actual or potential conflict of interest in respect of a specific candidate city. In the event of such a declaration by a member, or if such a conflict of interest comes to light, that member shall resign and the relevant Union institution or body shall replace that member for the remainder of the mandate, in accordance with its relevant procedure. |
Amendment 58 Proposal for a decision Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
2. The Member States shall publish a call for submission of applications six years before the beginning of the year of the title. |
2. The Member States shall publish a call for submission of applications at least six years before the beginning of the year of the title. |
Amendment 59 Proposal for a decision Article 8 – paragraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
1. Each of the Member States concerned shall convene the European panel for a pre-selection meeting with the candidate cities five years before the beginning of the year of the title. |
1. Each of the Member States concerned shall convene the European panel for a pre-selection meeting with the candidate cities five years before the beginning of the year of the title. If two consultative members are appointed by the Member States, they shall attend the meeting and bring their input to the discussion. |
Amendment 60 Proposal for a decision Article 8 – paragraph 2 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
2. The European panel shall assess the applications according to the criteria set out in Article 5. It shall agree on a short-list of candidate cities which are to be considered further and issue a report on the applications of all the candidate cities and recommendations to the short-listed candidate cities. |
2. The European panel shall assess the applications in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 5. Justifying its selection, it shall agree on a shortlist of candidate cities and issue a report on the applications of all the candidate cities and recommendations to the shortlisted candidate cities. |
Amendment 61 Proposal for a decision Article 9 – paragraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
1. The short-listed candidate cities shall complete their applications according to the criteria and the recommendations issued by the panel during its pre-selection meeting and transmit them to the Member States concerned, which shall then forward them to the Commission. |
1. The shortlisted candidate cities shall revise their applications so as to take into account the recommendations issued by the European panel during its pre-selection meeting, and shall transmit them to the Member States concerned, which shall then forward them to the Commission. |
Justification | |
Following a call for submission of applications the cities shall submit their applications already according to criteria. Therefore, the shortlisted cities shall rather revise/improve their applications following the recommendations by the panel. | |
Amendment 62 Proposal for a decision Article 9 – paragraph 2 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
2. Each of the Member States concerned shall convene the European panel for a final selection meeting with the short-listed candidate cities nine months after the pre-selection meeting. |
2. Each of the Member States concerned shall convene the European panel for a final selection meeting with the short-listed candidate cities nine months after the pre-selection meeting. If two consultative members are appointed by the Member States, they shall attend the meeting and bring their input to the discussion. |
Amendment 63 Proposal for a decision Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
2a. Where necessary, the Member State concerned, in consultation with the Commission, may extend that deadline for a reasonable period. |
Amendment 64 Proposal for a decision Article 9 – paragraph 3 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
3. The European panel shall evaluate the completed applications. |
3. The European panel shall evaluate the revised applications. |
Justification | |
See justification for amendment to Article 9.1. | |
Amendment 65 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
2. The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union a call for submission of applications six years before the beginning of the year of the title. This call shall be open to cities in all candidate and potential candidate countries, provided that these countries participate in the Creative Europe Programme or in the subsequent Union programmes supporting culture at the date of the publication of the call. |
2. The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union a call for submission of applications at least six years before the beginning of the year of the title. That call shall be open to cities in all candidate and potential candidate countries, provided that those countries participate in the Union programme supporting culture at the date of the publication of the call. |
Amendment 66 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
However, for reasons of equity with the cities in the Member States, every city shall only be allowed to participate in one competition for cities in candidate and potential candidate countries during the period from 2020 to 2033, and it shall not be possible for a city which participated in such a competition to participate in any subsequent competition in a new Member State under the rules laid down in Article 3(2) during that same period. |
However, for reasons of equity with the cities in the Member States, every city shall be allowed to participate in one competition only for cities in both the candidate and potential candidate countries during the period from 2020 to 2033, and it shall not be permissible for a city which participated in such a competition to participate in any subsequent competition in a new Member State, under the rules laid down in Article 3(2), during that same period. |
Amendment 67 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
Furthermore, also for reasons of equity with Member States, each candidate country or potential candidate country shall only be allowed to host the title once during the period from 2020 to 2033. Therefore, cities from countries which were already awarded the title shall not be allowed to participate in the subsequent competitions during that same period. |
Furthermore, each candidate country or potential candidate country shall only be allowed to host the title once during the period from 2020 to 2033. |
Amendment 68 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
4. The pre-selection of the cities shall be carried out by the European panel five years before the beginning of the year of the title, on the basis of the written application forms referred to in Article 4(2) only. No meeting with the candidate cities will be organised. |
4. The pre-selection of the cities shall be carried out by the European panel five years before the beginning of the year of the title, on the basis of the written application forms referred to in Article 4(2) only. No meeting with the candidate cities shall be organised. |
Amendment 69 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
The European panel shall assess the applications according to the criteria. It shall agree on a short-list of candidate cities which are to be considered further and issue a report on the applications of all the candidate cities and recommendations to the short-listed candidate cities. This report shall be submitted to the Commission and published on the Commission website. |
The European panel shall assess the applications in accordance with the criteria. It shall agree on a shortlist of candidate cities and issue a report on the applications of all the candidate cities and recommendations to the shortlisted candidate cities. That report shall be submitted to the Commission and published on the Commission's website. |
Amendment 70 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
5. The short-listed candidate cities shall complete their applications according to the criteria and the recommendations issued during the pre-selection and transmit them to the Commission. |
5. The shortlisted candidate cities shall revise their applications so as to take into account the recommendations issued during the pre-selection, and shall transmit them to the Commission. |
Justification | |
See justification for amendment to Article 9.1. | |
Amendment 71 Proposal for a decision Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
The European panel shall evaluate the completed applications. |
The European panel shall evaluate the revised applications. |
Justification | |
See justification for amendment to Article 9.1. | |
Amendment 72 Proposal for a decision Article 12 – paragraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
1. After their designation, the European Capitals of Culture of the same year shall seek to develop links between their cultural programmes. |
1. After their designation, the European Capitals of Culture of the same year shall seek to develop links between their cultural programmes. Further links may also be developed with other European Capitals of Culture. |
Amendment 73 Proposal for a decision Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
2. To this end, the Commission shall convene the European panel and the concerned cities to three meetings: the first meeting shall take place three years before the beginning of the year of the title; the second meeting shall take place eighteen months before the beginning of the year of the title and the third meeting shall take place two months before the beginning of the year of the title. The Member State or country concerned may nominate an observer to these meetings. |
2. To that end, the Commission shall convene three meetings, to be attended by the European panel and the cities concerned: the first meeting shall take place three years before the beginning of the year of the title; the second meeting shall take place eighteen months before the beginning of the year of the title and the third meeting shall take place two months before the beginning of the year of the title. If two consultative members are appointed by the Member States, they shall attend the meeting and bring their input to the discussion. |
Amendment 74 Proposal for a decision Article 14 – paragraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
1. The period covered by the present Decision will coincide with several multi annual financial frameworks. For each of these multiannual financial frameworks, the Commission shall examine the possibility to award a pecuniary Prize in honour of Melina Mercouri to the designated cities. The legal and financial aspects of this Prize shall be dealt with in the framework of the respective Union programmes supporting culture. |
1. The Commission may, within the framework of the respective Union programmes supporting culture, award a pecuniary prize in honour of Melina Mercouri ("the prize") to the designated cities. |
Amendment 75 Proposal for a decision Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
2. If the conditions laid down in Paragraph 1 are fulfilled and the Melina Mercouri Prize is awarded to a designated city, the Prize shall be paid no later than the end of June of the year of the title, provided that the city keeps to the commitments it made at the application stage and all the recommendations made by the European panel in the selection and monitoring reports were implemented. |
2. If the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 are fulfilled and the prize is awarded to a designated city, the amount of the prize shall be paid no later than the end of March of the year of the title, provided that the city in question keeps to the commitments it made at the application stage and provided further that all the recommendations made by the European panel in the selection and monitoring reports have been implemented. |
Amendment 76 Proposal for a decision Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point d | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(d) the communication strategy and the communication material used by the city clearly reflect that the European Capitals of Culture are an initiative of the Union; |
(d) the marketing and communication strategy and the communication material used by the city clearly reflect the fact that the European Capitals of Culture action is an official Union action; |
Amendment 77 Proposal for a decision Article 15 – point c | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(c) in the light of the objectives and criteria, establish guidelines to assist with the selection and monitoring procedures in close cooperation with the European panel; |
(c) in the light of the objectives and criteria set out in Article 2 and Article 5 respectively, establish guidelines to assist with the selection and monitoring procedures in close cooperation with the European panel; |
Amendment 78 Proposal for a decision Article 15 – point e | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(e) make public all relevant information and contribute to the visibility of the action at European level; |
(e) make public all relevant information and contribute to the visibility of the action at European and international level; |
Justification | |
There is a need for a greater global promotion of this currently well recognised initiative at the Union level. | |
Amendment 79 Proposal for a decision Article 15 – point f | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(f) foster the exchange of experience and of best practices between past, present and future Capitals, as well as candidate cities. |
(f) foster the exchange of experience and of best practices between past, present and future Capitals, as well as candidate cities, inter alia using already established formal and informal networks of the Capitals; |
Amendment 80 Proposal for a decision Article 15 – point f a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
(fa) update the touring exhibition created in celebration of the 25th anniversary of the European Capitals of Culture action; it shall also assume custody of that exhibition and support its participation in each new European Capital of Culture in order to convey to Union citizens the history and importance of the action. |
Amendment 81 Proposal for a decision Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
The Commission shall establish common guidelines and indicators for the cities based on the objectives and the criteria of the action in order to ensure a coherent approach to the evaluation procedure. |
The Commission shall establish common guidelines and indicators for the cities based on the objectives and the criteria of the action in order to ensure a coherent approach to the evaluation procedure. Those guidelines shall include the production of statistics on the impact of the Capital of Culture award on local tourism. |
Amendment 82 Proposal for a decision Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 – introductory part | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
The Commission shall present to the European Parliament, the Council and the Committee of the Regions: |
The Commission shall present to the European Parliament, the Council and the Committee of the Regions the following evaluation reports, accompanied, if appropriate, by relevant proposals: |
Justification | |
Given the relatively long time period that this Decision will cover, there is a need for a clause giving the Commission latitude to come up with a new proposal, if appropriate, along with the evaluation reports foreseen in the legal basis. | |
Amendment 83 Proposal for a decision Annex – table – row 2 – column 4 – footnote 7 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
7 The third column of the list referred to in the annex shall be updated if new countries accede to the Union after the adoption of the Decision. The order of their accession shall be respected. A minimum of six years shall be calculated between the date of the accession and the beginning of the year of the title in order to allow sufficient time for the selection and monitoring procedures. The maximum number of European Capitals of Culture in a given year shall not exceed three. If two or more countries accede to the Union at the same date and if no agreement on the order of participation can be reached between the countries concerned, the Council shall organise a draw. |
deleted |
Justification | |
Content of this footnote is reflected in the following Articles and amendments: Article 3.2.1. and amendment to this Article, amendment to Article 3.1.2., amendment to Article 3.2.2., amendment to Article 7.2.1. and amendment to Article 10.2.1. | |
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
The European Capitals of Culture were created in 1985 by intergovernmental initiative. It soon became a European Union action so as to enhance its reach and effectiveness. Since then this action has won widespread recognition and interest from across Europe, and grown into a highly sought-after award on the part of cities aiming at profiling themselves as European centres of culture and creativity. The European Capitals of Culture can be viewed as one of the most successful EU initiatives of the past few years.
Decision 1622/2006/EC, which laid the groundwork for the current scheme, will end in 2019. Competition for the title is currently launched six years ahead of nomination, in order to give the cities enough time for their preparations ahead of the start of the year of the title. Therefore, the aim is to adopt the new legal basis for the continuation of the European Capitals of Culture in 2013, so as to ensure a seamless transition in 2020.
The Commission's proposal
The Commission proposes the continuation of the European Capitals of Culture initiative after the current scheme ends in 2019.
The new proposal lists the order in which countries will be nominating cities for the title until 2033. In addition to two Member States sharing the title each year, the proposal suggests that EU candidate or potential candidate countries can also nominate a European Capital of Culture every third year.
This proposal retains the main features and structure of the current scheme. In particular, it suggests continuing to award the title on a rotating basis among Member States. The selection criteria have been amended so as to provide more detailed guidance to potential Capitals; this will also streamline the selection and monitoring processes of the cities involved. More focus has been placed on the enabling effect of the initiative in spurring long-term growth and urban development, as well as on the European dimension of the event and the quality of the cultural and artistic content for the year. The Commission's proposal results from several evaluations of the current scheme, as well as from various public consultations.
The Rapporteur's position
The Rapporteur welcomes the Commission's proposal to carry on with the ECOC action after 2019 on a renewed legal basis, addressing any issues encountered with the current Decision, and with a new annexed chronological list of Member States (from 2020 to 2033).
The Rapporteur supports, inter alia, the following:
- Keeping the two stage selection process carried out by a European panel of independent experts;
- A number of improvements to the evaluation system, which becomes more systemic, including new evaluation obligations for the cities themselves;
- Opening up this Union action to candidate and potential candidate countries.
A number of points in the proposal likely require, however, further improvement and clarification, as follows:
1. Criteria (Article 5):
The Rapporteur welcomes more explicit and detailed criteria in comparison with the current legal basis. Moreover, he considers that further improvements should be made in some of the criteria.
- The European dimension is a unique and essential element of this Union action, but on several occasions it was not well understood, and hence it remained rather limited. The Rapporteur intends to strengthen this criterion further in order to integrate various Union's programmes into the Year and focus on key long-term Union policies, leading to heightened awareness on the part of citizens within the EU.
Besides the cultural programme for the Year, the candidate cities should provide a showcase for implementing EU legislation and attracting Union support.
- Involvement of local civil society, and citizens' active participation in the preparation and implementation of the ECOC programme is essential to the success of the Year. Therefore, this point has been further strengthened in the criteria.
- Sustainability and long-term cultural, social and economic aspects should lie at the heart of the planning for the Year.
- Governance for an initiative of this scale is a rather complex undertaking, and all the relevant steps need to be carefully planned. Broad cross-party support for bidding for the Title through to the end of the Year is a key factor for success.
In this regard, making the award of the Melina Mercouri prize dependent on various conditions, such as honouring in full the commitments made during the bidding phase with regard to the budget and the content of the overall cultural programme, is welcomed.
2. Application (Article 4):
The Rapporteur agrees that the title has to be reserved to cities with a possibility to involve their surrounding regions, the awarding of the title being based on a cultural programme created specifically for the Year of the title. The Rapporteur supports the flexibility granted the cities in deciding on the possible involvement of their neighboring areas into the programme of the Year, and sees this approach as a positive trend worthy of encouragement.
3. European panel (Articles 6, 8 and 9)
The Rapporteur supports the Commission's attempt to ensure the quality, efficiency and impartiality of the work of selection, with the establishment of a European panel of independent experts. Nevertheless, in order to benefit from local sources of information, the option should be given to appoint two observers to the panel from the Member State concerned, both at the pre-selection and selection phases, and from any local managing authority involved at the monitoring stage.
The role of the Commission in establishing the European Panel must be more precisely described, as the Commission does not pre-select the experts for the Panel, but merely collates the names of available and eligible candidates.
4. Visibility of the action (Article 15):
The Rapporteur urges that the visibility of this currently well-recognized initiative be upheld at the Union level, but also deems that greater global promotion of this Union action is needed.
5. Revision of the future legal base (Article 16.2):
Given the relatively long time period that the future Decision will cover, the Rapporteur suggests introducing a clause giving the Commission latitude to come up with a new proposal, if appropriate, along with the evaluation reports foreseen in the legal basis.
Conclusion
The Rapporteur believes that European Capitals of Culture has been a success in many respects.
First, it is a culturally ambitious initiative, both in scope and size, which confers international prestige on the involved cities.
Second, the large number of applications that are received each year demonstrates that this initiative motivates citizens and organisations to implement strategies for sustainable development, which have a beneficial impact in both social and economic terms. Furthermore, the possibility of a boost in tourism over the long term plays a further essential role.
The new Commission's proposal for 2020-2033 highlights the fact that awarding his prestigious title spurs competitiveness within the cultural and creative sectors in Europe.
At a time of general economic crisis, a period that especially threatens our sense of European belonging, it is essential that incentives be created for long-term, well-managed cultural initiatives. In this context, a year-long programme of cultural activities must be established through the collaborative work of actors from the various sectors involved: from the art world, as well as leaders and protagonists of social volunteerism, and those engaged in scientific research and environmental protection.
It is for these reasons that the proposal aims to attribute great importance to the theme of the 'common roots' of Europe, not only in an abstract or idealised manner, but tangibly through the protection of sites of cultural heritage embodying the home of European cultural consciousness.
The European Capitals of Culture action shall aim at involving all layers of society in cultural activities. For a whole year, citizens, businesses, public administration and organisers will become the directors and actors of events at European level.
Given that this initiative has a European dimension, alongside a strong national identity, it would be desirable to occasionally develop collaborative activities across relevant Member States.
Taking into consideration that European Capitals of Culture action substantially contributes to enhancing the beautiful diversity that unites us, we trust that, in organisational terms, the relevant political actors can work together with the broadest possible consensus.
PROCEDURE
|
Title |
Union action for the ‘European Capitals of Culture’ for the years 2020 to 2033 |
||||
|
References |
COM(2012)0407 – C7-0198/2012 – 2012/0199(COD) |
||||
|
Date submitted to Parliament |
20.7.2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
Committee responsible Date announced in plenary |
CULT 11.9.2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
Rapporteur(s) Date appointed |
Marco Scurria 3.10.2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
Discussed in committee |
27.11.2012 |
20.3.2013 |
|
|
|
|
Date adopted |
28.5.2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
29 0 0 |
|||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Zoltán Bagó, Lothar Bisky, Piotr Borys, Jean-Marie Cavada, Silvia Costa, Santiago Fisas Ayxela, Lorenzo Fontana, Cătălin Sorin Ivan, Petra Kammerevert, Emilio Menéndez del Valle, Marek Henryk Migalski, Katarína Neveďalová, Doris Pack, Chrysoula Paliadeli, Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid, Marietje Schaake, Marco Scurria, Hannu Takkula, László Tőkés, Marie-Christine Vergiat, Milan Zver |
||||
|
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Liam Aylward, Heinz K. Becker, Nadja Hirsch, Iosif Matula, Rui Tavares, Isabelle Thomas |
||||
|
Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote |
Luigi Berlinguer, Marina Yannakoudakis |
||||
|
Date tabled |
19.6.2013 |
||||