Select Committee on European Legislation Tenth Report


CULTURAL HERITAGE PROGRAMME: RAPHAEL

3. We have given further consideration to the following on the basis of a Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum. We maintain our opinion[5] that it raises questions of political importance, and continue to make no recommendation for its further consideration at this stage:-

DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HERITAGE

(17648) 12608/96 COM(96) 627	Re-examined draft Decision establishing a Community action programme in the field of cultural heritage: the RAPHAEL programme.
Legal base:	Article 128; co-decision; unanimity.

Background

3.1  The RAPHAEL programme would support conservation, the development of techniques applied to the European cultural heritage, and increased access to it. We considered the European Parliament's amendments on 4 December, the document having been expected to go to Conciliation on 28 November. The Department of National Heritage subsequently wrote on 6 December to inform us that the Conciliation Committee was not expected to convene before 16 December. In her Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum, dated 14 January, on the re-examined proposal the Secretary of State for National Heritage (Mrs Bottomley) says that no date has been set yet by the Dutch Presidency.

The document

3.2  The Commission has accepted four amendments but has rejected others, the most important of which proposed a budget of 86 million ECU (£63.41 million)[6] over 4 years. The Common Position proposed a budget of 30 million ECU (£22.12 million). The Commission has split the difference and proposed a budget of 57 million ECU (£42.03 million) over 4 years. It has also proposed a number of smaller changes.

The Government's view

3.3  The Secretary of State says that:


"The UK can accept the Amendments which the Commission have accepted in their opinion...."


The UK rejects the Commission's compromise on Amendment 5 (budget) and re-iterates support for the common position budget of 30 million ECU (£22.12 million) over four years. The UK prefers the common position text rather than the Commission's modified proposal for Amendment 4 but could accept this proposal provided that Articles 7.2, 7.5 and 8.3 of the common position are retained in the new text."


Conclusion

3.4  The budget proposed by the European Parliament is considerably larger than the sums proposed in the Common Position and by the Commission in its re-examined proposal. If it were to be accepted we would expect a full account of how it is proposed that the money be spent. We ask the Government to continue to keep us informed and meanwhile we are not clearing the document.

---

5  (17648) - ; see HC 36-v (1996-97), paragraph 7 (4 December 1996). Back

6  At £1 = 1.3564 ECU. Back

---

Prepared 31 January 1997