Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 28 Nov 1995

Vol. 458 No. 8

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Media II Programme.

Liam Lawlor

Question:

28 Mr. Lawlor asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht the amount he expects the Irish Audio-Visual Industry to secure from the Media II 1995/2000 Programme which is worth £320 million across Europe; the plans, if any, he has to run a series of information campaigns on the criteria for EU funding under this Programme to draw the attention of those involved in the Irish Audio-Visual Industry to the different sub-schemes under the EU initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17549/95]

Mr. M. Higgins

The total amount of funds available under the MEDIA II 1996-2000 Programme is 310 million ecus, or approximately £250 million, and is by far the largest amount targeted at the promotion of artistic and cultural expression in the European Union to date.

I believe that the significant level of film and television production which is now under way in the State is a strong indication that the industry is well placed to benefit from MEDIA II. Moreover, I am pleased to inform the Deputy that I succeeded in securing important balances in the MEDIA II Programme to ensure that the circumstances pertaining in Ireland will be taken account of in its application. For example, the MEDIA II decision ensures that countries and regions with low levels of audio-visual production capacity and less widely-used languages will be taken account of in the programme. There is also a particular emphasis on the needs of small and medium-sized enterprises, which is a particular feature of the Irish industry.

I have to inform the Deputy, however, that while the EU Council of Culture Ministers has adopted the appropriate decisions for MEDIA II, the precise structures and criteria for, and practical application of, the programme have yet to be decided. In any event, since payments under MEDIA I were made directly from Brussels to film and television practitioners and it is likely that this arrangement will continue in some form for MEDIA II, it is not possible for me to indicate the amount of funds the Irish industry can secure from the MEDIA II Programme. It will depend on the draw down following the applications of the practitioners whom I expect to benefit proportionately more in terms of their preparedness.

Mr. Lawlor

As this is aimed particularly at the smaller operator and the less commercial but competent producers of such audio-visual productions, does the Minister feel it would be helpful to hold information seminars, perhaps at a later stage when more is known about the programme from Europe, so that we can maximise the financial advantages?

Mr. M. Higgins

I will be of as much assistance as I can in relation to this. In preparing for the Media II Programme which represents a considerable increase on Media I — the receipts on Media I will continue to be available and that should affect the gross sum available — the Irish position has been that from the outset we were in favour of a five-year programme. This was not the position taken by every other country. In addition, we were very much in favour of a tiered approach. I agree with the Deputy that if one were to make the benefits of Media II available for very large productions that would not necessarily be to the benefit of the diversity of practitioners on lower budgets. That is the significance of the tiered effect that has been built into the programme. It is a very important programme for us. Media II will be different from Media I in so far as Media I was structured on about 19 sub-programmes whereas Media II will be around three main poles — development, distribution and training.

I am confident that the developments in our indigenous industry will ensure a better capacity for drawdown. There have already been comprehensive consultations with practitioners and the industry in the preparation of Media II and these will prove valuable in the finalisation of details.

Miss de Valera

Will the Minister consider incorporating the general philosophy behind Media I and II in the Green Paper on broadcasting? Does he agree that from the beginning France tried to ensure that the European rather than the American influence on culture would be to the fore in the audio visual sector?

Mr. M. Higgins

I took a position on these matters at the European Council. Matters came to a head during the concluding stages of the GATT negotiations when it became clear that there was a huge imbalance between the European Union and the United States in terms of the audio visual sector. For example, exports in this sector from the European Union to North America amount to approximately £228 million while imports in the other direction are 12 times higher. This gave rise to questions about cultural domination and whether there should be a concept of cultural exception in this area, in other words it should not be regarded as a commodity which is traded. I favour this view. The second issue is the creation of capacity for film production, distribution, etc. If the production is right the jobs will be in Europe. The third dimension relates to tailoring the Irish industry and its mixed model through Bord Scannán na hÉireann. It is more important than section 35 to tailor Media II in such a way that it suits Irish practitioners. These have been achieved. It has started from the principle that acknowledges cultural exception and the need to maximise the employment and economic benefits of the cultural industries.