9 Amendments of Silvia COSTA related to 2016/2152(DEC)
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. RecallWelcomes the joint presentation made to CONT and the Committee on Culture and Education of the survey as requested in the 2013 discharge conducted to determine whether the LUX Prize is well known and how, if at all, it is viewed in their respective Member States and of the findings therein;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Regrets, however,calls that the survey mainly related to awareness of the LUX Film Prize among MEPs and film-makers, whereason the aim of the Prize which is to illustrate to citizens Parliament’'s commitment to consensual values such as human rights and solidarity, as well as its commitment to cultural and linguistic diversity;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Notes that the survey obtained a low response rate of 18 %, corresponding to 137 MEPs, and that it must be concluded that even among MEPs there is no consensus on the usefulness of the from all political groups and Member States, and that it must be concluded that the awareness rate among MEPs is higher than 90%, the understanding on the LUX Film Prize purpose by 75% of the MEPs is accurate and more than 80% have a positive image of the LUX Film Prize;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51 a (new)
Paragraph 51 a (new)
51a. Calls for alternative models to be consider for example, by establishing partnerships between the Parliament and third parties with the objective to further promote the LUX Film Prize in particular within the European film industry and the European public sphere, which will allow the Parliament to reinforce the budget of the LUX Film Prize but recalls that any kind of agreement must enhance, not weaken, the role and the visibility of the Parliament;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Notes that, although during the years the amount of spectators has increased, a number of 43.000 within the Union is still very low and makes the justification of the Lux Prize questionablethe decreasing trend in budgetary support to the LUX Film Prize itself during the years the amount of spectators has increased, thanks to communication activities and social media;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Notes with concern the on-going discussions on the nature of temporary exhibitions and is not conviEmphasises the importanced of the fact that deciding on the contents of exhibitions in the House of European History belongs to Parliament’s core business, let alone the management of a museumademic independence of the House of European History in terms of exhibition content and design, these being determined exclusively by museological and historical criteria;
Amendment 168 #
55. Calls therefore on the bureau to consider the separation ofadapting the management of the House from Parliament’s own administration and to create for this purpose a separate bodyof European History to a more inter- institutional approach, exploring further cooperation with othe necessary expertise for running a museumr institutions of the Union, especially the Commission and the Council;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Notes that with the establishment of the Parlamentarium and the opening of the House of European History, the Parliament and its surroundings are becoming a citizens' and tourist attraction, of which the Brussels municipalities benef that will bring about a better knowledge of the role of the Parliament and illustrate citizens on Parliament's commitment to consensual values such as human rights and solidarity and requests the Bureau to consider to enter into a dialogue with the local authorities to see how the latter can contribute to the financing and management of the House of European History;