Activities of Liadh NÍ RIADA related to 2015/2328(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Implementation of the Creative Europe programme (debate) GA
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the draft report on the implementation of Regulation (EU) No 1295/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing the Creative Europe Programme (2014 to 2020) and repealing Decisions No 1718/2006/EC, No 1855/2006/EC and No 1041/2009/EC (Text with EEA relevance)
Amendments (9)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. RDeeply regrets that a lack of financial capacity continues to be one of the main obstacles for potential applicants; encouragesdeeply regrets the delay on the part of the Commission, the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) and the Creative Europe national Desks to try to address the under-representation of micro cultural operators among funded organiszations and certain sectors in the Culture sub-programme; highlights, that despite the implementation of the strategic investment plan already in November 2014, which was conceived in such a way to partially address this problem, through the now so-called SMEW new products, in particular the uncapped guarantees which are to foster access to microfinance for vulnerable groups, micro-enterprises and social enterprises, have only recently been developed and contemplated for implementation on the second half of EFSIs initial investment period; deeply regrets the current lack of data to properly assess their impact;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Looks forward to seeing the initial resultsRegrets the delay on the implementation of the Financial Guarantee Facility launched in 2016; by easing the access of SMEs and microbusinesses to loans, and calls for its preliminary results and assessment to be made available already by the end of the first trimester of 2017; underlines that easing the access of SMEs and microbusinesses to loans will only fulfil providing the additionality criterion if properly and duly complemented with the necessary grants; expects this new market instrument to help the cultural and creative sectors, which account for 4.4 % of the EU’s GDP and 3.8 % of its workforce, realise their full potential as a promising source of growth and jobs and as drivers of competitiveness, cultural diversity and cross-border cooperation; regrets, however, that the Facility will most probably only work in those countries where a similar instrument is already in place;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas Creative Europe haswill proved to be a successful programme in terms of its objectives if those objectives are not geared one-sidedly to economic effects and parameters and instead place more emphasis on the specific features of culture and its contribution to democratic dialogue and the discussion on values and future developments looking beyond economic success;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the Creative Europe Programme,’s sub-programmes are seriously underfinanced in pvarticular, its Culture Sub-programme, ious ways, since the focus on networks, marketing and dis seriously underfinancedmination and a fresh audience and new recipients is insufficient;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Urges the Member States to increase the Creative Europe budget in line with the ambitions of the programme, accepting that the values of cultural production cannot be gauged in terms of economic figures alone;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Asks the Commission to enhance the programme’s consistency with all relevant EU policies and other funding sources and thereby to take due account of the particular creative processes and creativity of cultural production, which produce aesthetic discoveries and communicative innovations for society now and in the future;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Asks the Commission to strike a better balance, in both sub-programmes and in the guidelines for evaluators, between the artistic and creative component and the managerial and innovative aspects, especially ofin relation to both the projects funded and, in particular, CCI;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Underlines the success and significance of the European Capital of Culture scheme, and calls for better use of the know-how of capitals of culture for the development ofcultural dialogue and democratic exchange in the development of cities, including long-term support for the local cultural scene in cities;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Asks the Commission to guarantee a geographic and sectoral balance in the Guarantee Facility, evaluate its impact, in particular on small cultural enterprises, cultural mediators and networkers, and examine possibilities as regards the development of synergies with EFSI and other programmes;