International Network for Cultural Diversity
January 2006
Vol. 7 No 1
Contents:
1. INCD News and Announcements
2. GATS Negotiations and Cultural Policies
3. Defending Cultural Diversity from the WTO, Hong Kong
4. Korea Reduces Screen Quota
5. Events and Announcements
1. INCD News and Events
Staff update
The INCD is pleased to announce that Mrs. Antje Behrens has been appointed INCD Coordinator for Europe. Working from an office in Brussels, Mrs. Behrens will collaborate with INCD Steering Committee, members and funders to build INCD membership in the region and to carry the European concerns to the international organization. Some of you may have met Ms. Behrens at the recent INCD meeting in Senegal. We are pleased to welcome her and look forward to a successful year.
INCD formally establishes in Europe
In a related development, INCD Europe was officially established at a meeting held in Brussels on February 1, 2006. As a legally constituted non-governmental organization, it will facilitate European members working together to achieve the objectives of INCD.
2. GATS Negotiations and Cultural Policies
As reported in the last issue of the INCD Newsletter, the December meeting of trade ministers in Hong Kong has given new impetus to the WTO’s Doha Round of negotiations. One of the decisions reached by ministers was a new process for GATS negotiations that, according to INCD Steering Committee member Jane Kelsey, “will directly affect audiovisual services, and other sectors with major impacts on culture, such as telecommunications, computer-related services and logistics (including distribution services).
Ms. Kelsey, a professor of law at Auckland University, describes this process in the following terms:
“During the GATS negotiations groups of governments that share an interest in opening up a particular sector have formed what are called ‘friends’ groups. That includes ‘friends of audio-visual services’, and during the opposition to the UNESCO Convention ‘the friends of cultural diversity’. The US has been a key player, along with Taiwan, Hong Kong China and Mexico….
“(In place of the previous bilateral negotiating process), the final Declaration from the Hong Kong meeting endorsed a ‘plurilateral’ approach, as a way to push the process faster. Groups of WTO members who have an interest in a particular sector can put a collective request to other WTO members asking for specific commitments in that sector.…
“Any government that receives these requests must consider them. In theory, they can consider and then reject them. But it will be difficult for targeted governments to avoid direct discussions with the group making the demand. This means the pressure on governments to make commitments will be much greater than before….
“The groups that draw up these sectoral requests will be based around the ‘friends’ groups. Only those groups that claim a ‘critical mass’ of the international trade in that particular service are expected to use the plurilateral process, although it is unclear what ‘critical mass’ means.”
The groups that are preparing collective requests include the audiovisual services, computer-related services, logistical services and telecommunications services, each of which has implications for cultural policies.
According to Ms. Kelsey, “The main targets for these demands are expected to be Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia (not Venezuela); Egypt, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, South Africa; ASEAN countries, China, India and Korea; plus OECD countries.”
The Hong Kong Declaration also states that the minimum commitment that all governments should offer is to lock in their current level of liberalization, including in the audiovisual sector. This would preclude any future changes to measures that would be more “trade restrictive.”
In the new timetable, “Demandeurs will meet, identify a critical mass and common demands, and send these ‘requests’ by 28 February 2006. Revised offers are to be submitted by 31 July 2006 and final draft schedules are meant to be tabled by 31 October 2006.
3. Defending Cultural Diversity from the WTO
Report on the INCD Seminar in Hong Kong
By Susan Crean, co-chair
Creators’ Rights Alliance
December, 2005
“Defending Cultural Diversity from the WTO” was the title of the INCD’s seminar in Hong Kong during the 6th Ministerial meetings of the World Trade Organization. The event took place on December 14th at the Boys and Girls club on Lockhart Road in Wan Chai, a street that would become notorious the following Saturday when demonstrators broke through police barriers and approached the Convention Centre where negotiators were slaving into the night on an agreement that would keep the so-called Doha Development Round breathing.
Fifty to sixty people packed into the room at 6pm, about an equal mix of local people and visitors. Professor Jane Kelsey chaired the event with great élan. (‘Our Jane’ as the Kiwi farmer I met coming in from the airport called her, allowing that he’d once been a student of hers.) Introducing, singer/songwriter Moana Maniapoto, Kelsey described meeting her in the classroom too, “Moana being someone who actually went to law school and decided not to become a lawyer.” Moana, a name meaning ocean, had the astonishing experience of receiving papers threatening a lawsuit from a German businessman when she went to Europe to perform. He informed her he had trademarked the word Moana and it was not hers to use, not in Germany and not to make money with (for example from recordings or concerts). “Guarding the Family Silver”, the documentary by Maori filmmaker Toby Mills, recounts Maniapoto’s experience, and her subsequent travels through intellectual property law.
The screening of “Guarding the Family Silver” was followed by a short question and answer period, and then an excellent overview of the situation at the WTO, culture, services and the GATS negotiations given by Prof. Kelsey. There is a move, she said, not only to push more services into the pot, but to move away from the tradition of states making their own choice of what to offer. The push for “benchmarks” would require states to include a defined number of services sectors under their GATS obligations. She also spoke of the recently passed UNESCO convention on cultural diversity, noting two things: (1) that UNESCO possess no powers to enforce the convention and has zero impact on trade courts/panels; (2) that the US rejoined UNESCO after nineteen years in order to oppose the treaty, which it did, vociferously.
The balance of the evening was devoted of a series of lively, informal presentations in lieu of a panel. This part of the program was chaired by Professor Stephen Ching-Kiu Chan of Lingnan University. Once Moana agreed to sing a short song for the gathering, everyone else was pressed by Professor Kelsey to make a musical offering.
Yvon Thiec, Association of TV and Film Producers (EUROCINEMA) and INCD Steering Committee member, direct from the airport and exhausted from several long days monitoring the passage of new legislation at the EU regarding on-line content, reported that the provisions for the promotion of domestic work had been kept in the new law. “The UNESCO convention has become a new principle in international law,” he stated. “It is now politically correct in Europe, and the work currently being done on a European constitution will certainly enshrine cultural diversity.” He was followed by Dr. Mirana Szeto, of Hong Kong University who sang a short aria (“not Chinese opera”) and then gave a fascinating talk about local agit-prop/protest groups like Disney Hunter and SSOCOM – Students and Scholars against Corporate Misbehaviour – who are currently active in Hong Kong. The former has actually succeeded in getting Disney to the table. However, Disney Hunter is no regular NGO but just a group of young ‘artivists’ who produce work competing with Disney’s idealism and fantasy. They’ll show up in a magazines and newspapers, for example. “They simulate Disney, and outdo them, saying, we don’t like your fantasy. A moving target, they’re proven hard to pin down, and very effective,” she explained. Once they’ve opened up an issue, SSCOM moves in with recommendations, and analysis.
In general, Dr. Szeto sees Hong Kong as so thoroughly colonized that little original culture is left. People have a hard time defining Hong Kong culture, or understanding what needs protecting. However, there is a movement of activists who have a vision of direct, participatory democracy that is rooted in local culture. Whatever the issue, though, there is no department of culture in HK, and no mechanism for raising the issues as matters of public policy.
Ted Murphy, the Australian trade union activist spoke next about the US/Australian FTA and the bilateral experience, concluding with a rousing rendition of “Solidarity Forever”. Dr. John Erni of the English and Communication Department of City University in Hong Kong followed with an informative and moving presentation about Victoria Harbour and the movement to curb development which was reclaiming more and more land, damaging habitat and destroying cultural heritage. In the late 1990s, the cause won a victory when an ordinance was passed that protects the harbour, presumes against further reclamation and allows it only if present (current) public good demands. In this connection, he talked about the significance of the Korean farmers who’d jumped into the habour (in life jackets, but without knowing how to swim) reclaiming public space, highlighting the fact that the Convention Centre sits on what formerly was water.
Joel Garduce of the concerned Artists of the Philippines spoke of the negotiations currently going on with the US. “We will try to use the UNESCO convention to resist commitments in the service areas,” he said. He referred to the bankrupt dogma of the WTO, and the necessity of exposing its real effects. His musical offering was a popular protest-anthem from the Philippines peoples’ movement that several others joined in singing. And so the meeting ended.
Notes: The Department of Cultural Studies at Lingnan University was the co-presenter of the seminar. Other attendees observed that, by the middle of the meeting, there were more than 100 people in attendance, making this the largest civil society event held in Hong Kong.
4. Korea Reduces Screen Quota
The cultural diversity movement received depressing news in January, with the announcement from Korea that the government has responded to U.S. pressure and agreed, effective July 2006, to slash the screen quota to 73 days, only one-half of the original quota implemented in 1993. Enforcement of the original screen quota system resulted in a flourishing of the Korean movie industry, both creatively and economically. The market share of Korean movies increased from 16% to 47% in slightly more than a decade.
The existence of the screen quota system has been the most significant impediment to further trade negotiations between Korea and the United States. Thus, it was not surprising that on February 1, 2006 the United States announced that it is launching free trade talks with Korea.
The Korean decision was hailed by U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman. In an obscene form of doublespeak that ignores the facts, Portman stated that the decision would increase the choices available to Korean moviegoers, "The long-standing Korean requirement that domestic films be shown on local theater screens 146 days out of the year placed US movies at a significant disadvantage. Today's move to reduce the requirement by half to 73 days will help level the playing field and increase movie choices for Koreans."
The Korean Screen Quota Action Alliance and most of the cultural community is vigorously opposing this decision. Below are excerpts from their Press Release.
5. Korea is turning itself into a cultural colony of the US!
Screen Quota Action Alliance
Press Conference, January 26, 2006
"People in the film industry were shocked by the Ministry of Finance and Economy’s announcement regarding its decision to reduce the screen quota to 73 days. The present government, which has been known for its advocacy of independent diplomacy and equal Korea-US relations, not only surrendered to trade pressure of the arrogant US but also betrayed the belief of the public, artists, cultural experts and film makers. We would call it a cultural coup d’etat... .
"Han Deok-soo insisted nine years ago, when he was serving as the director of the trade negotiation department, “the screen quota is not helpful for improving competitiveness because it is a protective system.” Now, as the Minister of Finance and Economy, he stated, “The film industry has become competitive thanks to the screen quota. Therefore it is ok to reduce the quota now.”...
"(The Korean government decision to slash the screen quota represents a defeat for the) UNESCO Cultural Diversity Convention adopted last October. The UNESCO Convention carries legal binding force to exclude the cultural field in negotiation process by guaranteeing (the sovereign right of states) to establish and implement cultural policies as an international law. South Korea’s screen quota system and the struggle to protect it have become a (positive) example of (civil society) movements assisting the establishment of the convention. Of course, people in the film industry have been the driving force behind it. However, the (Korean) Government seems to have decided to join hands with the US and Israel, turning its back on 147 nations, making itself a laughingstock in the international society, and reducing itself to a US colony....
"The Government of Korea will allure its people by saying it will provide (sufficient subsidies) to the film industry in return for (slashing) the screen quota. (If) movies are produced thanks to the budget given by the government, do you think these films will still have a chance be shown in theaters when there is no longer a way to protect Korean movies against Hollywood? Even if excellent movies are made, what does that mean if people cannot see them? Considering what Mexico went through in 1993, Brazil in the 70s, and situations in Taiwan and New Zealand, it is not hard to imagine how Korea’s film industry will go down without a protective system against Hollywood’s monopoly.
"The screen quota is a pride of the world’s cultural movement and a symbol of cultural sovereignty .... For the sake of Korea’s interests and pride, we declare that we will fight against the trade pressure of the US and satisfy our requests and demands with every possible means."
The Korean coalition is urging INCD members to write to Korea’s President to protest this decision. Further information is available from cdmi@korea.com
6. Events and Announcements
If we have missed your organization’s event, please contact the Secretariat at incd@ccarts.ca for inclusion in the next newsletter.
The politics of Arts & Culture: International Perspectives
Columbia University
May 23 to June 8, 2006
New York – USA
www.tc.edu
Third World Summit on the Arts and Culture
June 14-17 2006
Newcastle Gateshead, England
www.ifacca.org
22nd European Group for Organisation Studies Colloquium
European Group for Organisation Studies
July 6-8, 2006
Bergen – Norway
www.egosnet.org
32nd Annual Conference on Social Theory, Politics and the Arts
July 9-11, 2006
Vienna – Austria
Fourth International Conference on Cultural Policy Research
ICCPR
July 12-16, 2006
Vienna – Austria
International Conference on the Arts in Society
Common Ground
August 15-18, 2006
Edinburgh – Scotland
The INCD would like to thank the Government of Canada for on-going financial support. We wish also to thank the Swedish International Development Agency, the Government of France and the Flemish community for providing important contributions to our work.