8 Cultural diversity
| (24842)
12164/03
COM(03) 520
| Commission Communication — Towards an international instrument on cultural diversity.
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 27 August 2003
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 8 September 2003
|
| Department | Culture, Media and Sport
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 23 October 2003
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
8.1 In November 2001, UNESCO adopted the Universal Declaration
on Cultural Diversity. Article 5 of the Declaration states that
cultural rights are an integral part of human rights. It continues:
"All persons should therefore be able to express themselves
and to create and disseminate their work in the language of their
choice, and particularly in their mother tongue; all persons should
be entitled to quality education and training that fully respect
their cultural identity; and all persons should be able to participate
in the cultural life of their choice and conduct their own cultural
practices, subject to respect for human rights and fundamental
freedoms".
8.2 UNESCO's Secretariat produced a paper called Desirability
of drawing up an international standard-setting instrument on
cultural diversity for discussion at the UNESCO General Conference
earlier this autumn. It is now expected that UNESCO will draft
a binding international Convention for discussion at its next
General Conference in 2005.
8.3 Article 151 of the EC Treaty provides for the Community to
promote and protect cultural diversity.
The document
8.4 In time for this autumn's UNESCO Conference, the Commission
produced this Communication. It endorses the case for a legally
binding instrument on cultural diversity and proposes that the
objectives of the instrument should be to :
promote cultural diversity;
contribute to understanding, respect and dialogue
between cultures;
develop international cooperation, aimed at boosting
exchanges of cultural goods and services, including those of developing
countries;
favour the development of cultural policies at national,
regional and international levels;
provide a forum for discussion of cultural policies
and of best practice;
provide technical support and expertise; and
establish arrangements to monitor cultural diversity.
8.5 The Commission says that a binding instrument
of the kind it envisages:
"would not affect and be without prejudice [sic]
to the international legal framework applicable to exchanges of
cultural goods and services — in particular as regards their
trade and intellectual property rights aspects".
8.6 The Communication proposed that the Commission
should be authorised to negotiate with UNESCO on behalf of the
EC and Member States.
The Government's view
8.7 The Minister for the Arts, Department for Culture,
Media and Sport (Estelle Morris) tells us that the Government
supports UNESCO's wish to encourage cultural diversity but is
not sure what UNESCO seeks to bind by the proposed instrument.
Moreover, the Government agrees with the Commission that any such
instrument should not prejudice the existing international legal
framework, particularly in the area of trade.
8.8 The Minister adds that the UNESCO EU Working
Group rejected the Commission's proposal that it should negotiate
on behalf of Member States, and agreed that if Member States wished
to speak as one on UNESCO issues, the Presidency would speak for
them.
Conclusion
8.9 We are grateful to the Minister for her helpful
Explanatory Memorandum. While supporting the preservation of cultural
diversity, we share the Government's uncertainty about what an
international instrument of the sort UNESCO has in mind would
bind. We agree with the Government and the Commission that any
such instrument should not prejudice the existing international
legal framework. We share the view that Member States themselves
(or, if they wish, the Presidency), rather than the Commission,
should speak on these issues.
8.10 The Communication was, in our view, a timely
contribution to thinking in preparation for the UNESCO General
Conference. It has no direct legal or financial implications for
the UK. In clearing the document from scrutiny, we draw it to
the attention of the House because of the political importance
of the subject.
| 
