Why we need European cultural policies: the impact of EU ...

Following the EU principle of `complementarity’, some of the rules designed to achieve such policygoals could still be implemented at the level of member states. The difference would be that therewould be a clear responsibility, at EU level, not only to support their national cultures but also toinvest in more balanced exchanges within the EU. Indirectly, this would ease the pressure on theEU budget. It would also be likely to make future EU funding programmes more effective as theirobjectives would be based on a well-established and articulated policy.There are at least two major obstacles to a more proactive approach towards cultural policymakingin the EU. First is Article 151, with its explicit exclusion of culture from any harmonizationof the member states’ laws and regulations. This is a barrier, despite various interpretations of thelegal value of the exclusion and the claims of some authors that the legal strength of the Article151 is overestimated. (Pauwels 2003; Niedobitek 1997)The second obstacle is a lack of political will for such a shift. This is highly controversial, and givencurrent developments in the EU it is really hard to imagine any such a shift in the near future.For the new member countries and candidate countries, still in the middle of fundamental changesand searching for models to adapt their cultural markets to the new requirements, lack of a morearticulated cultural policy means that they will have to rely almost exclusively on their own policysolutions, without much guidance. Had there been a more proactive European cultural policy,it would have helped move culture higher on the policy agendas of these countries because,as pointed out by one of the respondents to my questionnaire, national priorities are very muchshaped by those formulated in Brussels. While `old member states’ have a much longer traditionof balancing cultural and economic aspects of culture, the cultural sector in transition countrieshas had to deal with the transitional crisis, including requests for rapid privatization in the culturalfield and restructuring, at the same time as it has been having to fight for the survival of basiccultural infrastructure.Despite such difficulties, all these countries have started to build functional cultural markets,depending on their specific circumstances. As with the World Trade Organization negotiations,it is important to monitor developments in Brussels to ensure that adequate policies are put intopractice and that cultural aspects do not lose out as the logic of the economy and free markettakes over.On the other hand, full membership of the EU has created an opportunity for the new memberstates to fully participate in the decision-making process and to put pressure, where necessary,to get some of their priorities onto the agenda. It has also opened up yet another channel forknowledge and experiences to be exchanged; this can benefit culture even if it is not a result of adeliberate cultural policy.Following the logic of UNESCO’s 2005 Convention73