It is never nominated by Draghi in the European Competitiveness Report, and in the new European Commission, it is assigned to the weakest ministry. Why?
Let’s start with the facts. The cultural and creative sector represents about 4.4% of the European Union’s GDP and generates over 500 billion euros in revenue annually. It is therefore comparable to other major industries like agriculture or financial services. It contributes to the European economy not only in direct economic terms but also in terms of employment, innovation, social cohesion, and, not least, the international impact of Europe. Through art, music, literature, fashion, films, and design, Europe remains a global cultural power, projecting its values and identity worldwide, including the value of democracy and human rights, influencing diplomatic relations and attracting foreign investment.
However, in the recent Draghi’s report on the competitiveness of the European Union –competitiveness has become the new mantra – the word “culture” is never mentioned.
Moreover, for the new European Commission, the cultural portfolios have been separated from education for the first time. Culture is listed as the second title in the competences of the Ministry of “Intergenerational Fairness, Culture, Youth, Sport.”
This ministry has been assigned to Maltese Glenn Micallef, a young 35-year-old official who was given this portfolio essentially as a “punishment” because Malta refused to propose a woman or a more experienced person as Commissioner, according to rumors circulating in Brussels.
Based on the different degrees of “competence,” or legislative power, that the EU has over various matters, some “ministries” are considered more important than others. For example, the EU has exclusive competence in competition policies, which is why the portfolio of Competition is one of the most prestigious within the Commission.
Exclusive competences are those in which only the European Union can legislate. Member states, upon joining the European Union, decided to pool action in these areas, allowing the EU to independently enact binding laws for all member states.
Then there are shared competences, also called concurrent competences, where agreement must be reached. Finally, there are areas under the exclusive competence of individual states, where the EU cannot legislate but can only support “from the outside,” mainly by financing certain strategic activities.
Culture has always been an exclusive competence of individual states, along with education, sports, youth policies (and also human health protection, as we saw during COVID). Usually, the President of the European Commission pairs these portfolios with others of greater political weight. For example, currently, Cypriot Stella Kyriakidou is the Commissioner for Health Protection (an area of exclusive national competence) and at the same time for Consumer Protection (a shared competence).
But this time, “poor” Micallef has been assigned only competences in which the EU has no legislative power, effectively making his ministry insignificant.
The European Commission has recently adopted a “Work Plan for Culture 2023-26,” and mainly funds the Creative Europe program with a budget of only 2.2 billion euros to be spent between 2021 and 2027, aimed at promoting cultural and linguistic diversity and European cultural heritage, especially in relation to digitization, tourism, and enhancement.
Not only is there a noticeable decline in interest in this field from the European Commission, but there is also a different focus.
The first time that culture was explicitly mentioned as a mandate for a European Commissioner was with the Delors Commssion (1985-1989) ane with the Prodi Commission (1999-2004) with particular attention to heritage protection. Viviane Reding was appointed Commissioner for Education and Culture.
Over the years, other areas were added to this role, from youth to multilingualism, from sports to research, effectively diluting the mandate and shifting the focus from heritage protection to cultural integration. With the new Commission, it seems that the lowest point has been reached.
Yet, about 8.7 million people work in this sector in Europe (about 3.8% of total EU employment), from creatives (artists, writers, musicians) to technicians (set designers, digital programmers, cultural marketing experts, diagnostics specialists). It is a sector that particularly attracts young people, with a higher percentage of workers under 30 compared to other sectors. Additionally, it fosters innovation, with a high percentage of freelancers and small and medium-sized enterprises, which often experiment with new technologies and business models. The cultural sector also has a multiplier effect on other industries, such as tourism.
Moreover, cultural and creative policies promote interaction between different communities, contribute to mutual understanding, and provide participation opportunities for people of all ages and backgrounds.
So why is the cultural sector not mentioned in the Draghi report, and why does it receive so little consideration from the European Commission? Who has made it disappear? Who is afraid of culture?
