Tobacco Documents Online

EAT Statement on the 63reen, Paper Hearinas of 12-11 December 1984 Under the Chairmanship of Ivo Schwartz (DiG III) EAT attended a two-day hearing called by the Commission, in Bruxelles on 12-13th December. Two full days of discussion and exchange of' views ensuredi oni the C'ommiIssioni''s Green Paper 'Television Without Frontiers', a 3'67 ' page report,, during which most of' the time was spent on Section VI ( advertising ) , Present were representatives of EAT and each of its 6 constituent members,, the World Federation of' Advertisers, European Association of Advertising, Agencies, European Group of Television Advertising, Communaut6 des Associations d'es Editeurs d'ies Journaux de: la CEE, Federation of Associationss of Periodical Publishers in the EEC and the Advertising Information Group, additionally, UNIC'E (Industry Associations of' the EEC) , European, Broadcasting UniIon, IAPPI (International InteLlectual Property Association),,. International Bar Association, International Chamber of Commerce, and the four main constituent members of the EEC Consumers Consultative Committee,(BEUC (consumers) ETUC (trades union), COFACE (family) and EUR.O-C©OP ( cooperatives) )i On the Commission's side were representatives of DiG III, DG X', DG XI and th~e Legali Service,, plus two special consultants (Professors in law respectively from Munich andi Milan).

Results The results of the discussions over the two days will be the subject of a summary prepared by the Commission. While this is being prepared, however, the Commission has indicated that it is willing to receive any further comments, information, or statistics which participants wilsh toisubmit up to February 28th, 1985. It should also to:be reme,mbered that further discussion days for interested parties are being, organized by the: Commission; particularly 16-1I7th January on the sub jeot of copyright. Subsequent to that, the C'ommission will also: ~ ~ hag discussions on children and young people,, and! the right of' reply. (All these 3 additional s.ubj'ect& ~ were included in the Green Raper.) Throughout the meeting. many references were made to Article ~r. r 1'~0 of the i 1~#R andi p~articipants noted' that the IC'C was: ~ organizing an important seminar on this subject in Paris thee day after the copyright discussions end in Brussels (i.e. 1'8th January 1985). The Commission's I!ntentions Duri'ng the hearing itself, under the able1Chairmanship of Dr. Schwartz, it was clear that the Commission eonsidered' itt completel!y necessary to accept the opinions that the European Parliament expressed during many debates and in the passing of resolutions over the last 2 years. The Commission therefore.considered it neeessary to draft a Directive.

The advertising, interests, although expressing many reservations as to whether these problems could not instead' be handled between broadcasters, took no.te of Commission's intentions. t.h e Dr. Schwartz made it clear that it was necessary to have a liberalizing directive because of the IDebauve case (e<•sz ~`s~,~~~~"~7K~~~~~ Th~e Commi'ssion had! to deal with the situation in Belgium C~.~.., E c~ and Denmark on the basis that all 10 Member States have to ~ ). ....,...~.~ move towards aCommon Market and to, authorize advertising across frontiers as well in each of'the Ten. The adverti'~silng business was in complete: agreement with this positive concept of liberalization and the right for advertising, to, make its appearanoe! across all 1!0 Member States, t Iyus-i.nes-3---Was- reement. The Definition of "'Droadcasting" There wa s some eonfusilon as to the d'efinition of 'broadcasting' - a matter that was mentioned several times during the 2 days, although it was clear that rad3o broadcasting was defilnitely included. Participants,, and the Commission itself, felt that greater clarity was needed to define what was andi what was not 'broad'calsting''. Work will now start on this. Another lesser concern was whether the Commission, had eonsideredl the fact tha~t satellite foiotprints from outside e the Co~mmon, MarketZwere i'n danger of negating the proposed solutions within the Ten:. Dr. Schwartz wase quite clear, on, behalf of' the Gommission,, that alithough this might be a problem at present, the Commission could only tackle thee problems with the C'omm!unity.. N fl N Cj N ~ N Ul L70 Q'

T'he! Commission explained th~at the various European Parliament and individual government pressures indicated! that the principle of liberalization cou,ld not be left on x its own, but required certain limitation>to be imposed. The hearing set about discussing the Commi'ssion''s &etailede proposals for such limitations. There were, roughly speaking, four general points of view put forward on these limitations:- ~ ~ i) By lawyers, particularly the views of the ~1 and thee consultant professors; ii) by consumers expressing their views through their respective bodies;; iii') by advertising andi media interests (but see (iv) below); iv ) by newspa~pers ( C'AEJ ), an~d magazine s!( FAEP) , whose special vilews expressed particular concern about any sudden explosion of' the advertising market as a result of the: liberalization programme. Generally the views expressed by consumer bodies w~ere that while agreeing the liberalization principle, they required upwards harmonization, and did not accept the a~ttitudes of x the advertisingX business, or even in some respects the / Commission's attitude as expressed iin the Green, Paper. They were particularly concerned about limiting the amount of n time permitted for advertising , fearing that private broadcasting might grow as the result of liberalization.

5. Everyone agreed the general principles of' clear distinction between 10- programmilng and advertisements. All aSjt@p-tl that question of' sponsoring, in all its many and varied forms, should be further studied. The views of advertising org;anizations, which, had been well documented in advance, were re-expressed' according to the comments and questionss raised ini the debates. Those views continued to express particular concernLabout the following issues:- i), Percentage of air time allowahle ii) length of individual commercials; iii ) natural breaks andl block advertising; iv) length of advertising slots; pre-vetting of commercials; vi) advertising of tobacco; vii) advertising of alcohal;; vii~i) advertising to c.hildreni. The advertising interests pressed for a de-regu.latory policy, i~nstead of any attempt to harmonize by standardizing the most restrictive rul!es in the Community. If 'harmonization upwards' were to, take place with the added proviso at the same time th~at individual Membgr States could ad~opt even harsher rules, the Commission would then have to 're-harmonize" on the basis of these: harsher rules in order to avoid future distortions. This could lead neither to a

free Common Market economy, nor could it ever achieve the Commission's stated! objective of liberalization. The Commission stated that a poliiey of de-regulation is indeed a viable opti'on. Speakers from the advertising, business pointed' out that the phrase "Common.M'arket"'not only emphasized, 'common' but also 'market'. Markets were places where competition exiisted between, selliers, and where buyers and sellers were brough~t together. The emphasis on a free market economy must be kept in mind at all times. Additionally,, ilt must be! remembered that the amount of money spent on, advertisilng was in no way infinite but had very finite limits. Self-Regulation A' lengthy discussion took place on the subject of self-regulation and its positioni vi's!-a-vis statutory control. The C'ommission considered that, because of' some countries' constitutional provisions, the directive should not require statutory pre-vetting and, therefore, accepted that it would be necessary to rely ono existing self-regulatory systems which include pre-vetting. This wouldl enable broadicasting, professionals to carry out the pre-vetti~ng.

T Duri~ng the discussions at the hearing a number of issues which were unclear in the Gommission"s G'reeni Paper were elucidated. These included:- A firm statement that the Commission did not intend too differentiate between publi~c and private broadcasters! within the context of the amount of advertising money which theq eould! earn. ii), T'he 'eodes" proposed by the Commission to cover ,C general advertising standards, ad'vertising, to children and advertising of alcohol would be incorporated in thed propiosed lirective. iii) The Commission reaffirmed! that they would not be proposing harmonization of advertising, of product groups other than tobacco. Given the fact that pipe tobacco and cigars can be advertised on television in the: UK, the Commission noted, the Advertising, I;n-du st-W-s argument that these products should' therefore be allowed to be advertised on TV throughout the! Comm~unity. Time-T'able Dr., Schwartz gave hils opinion as to EE!C future: action to draft, agree and implement the: legislations. Directive in national He hoped that by mid-suimmer a, draft would be available for preliminary consideration by the Council of Ministers: and the European Parliament. In the Parliament (and the Economic and Social Committee)' certain committees would first be asked for their, opinions and reports prior to plenary debate. After that, the Commission would! examine these

8 opinions to decide if it should prop~ose any amendments to ~ the draf~already in th~e hands of' the Council of Ministers. It was expected that these processes would be complete: by mid- 119180, alithough they might take longer. 4 Meanwhile:, at the level of the Council of Ministers, a somewhat similar process to that in the Parliament would be taking place. A simillar amount of time might be.taken. During these processes the Commission, would also be prepared to continue its discussions with outside bodies, particularly in the light of new technical and advertising developments likely to occur over the next 2-3 years. When the Counci'1 of Ministers had finally been able to: reach agreement and a~ireativewas issued, there would theni be a further period of time (probably 2 years) during which national laws 1-eg!7&-tMs woul~d' have! to, be brought into approximate.line with the,Directive. Further detailed information, available from Mr. Alastair Tempest, Secretary of the European Advertising Tripartite,. 28 ave. du Blarbeav, 1160' Bruxelles. Tel (02) 672 43 36 or 672 45 60.