THIS week MEPs will agree a directive which will prevent sporting events from being shown exclusively on pay per view or subscription television.
The Television Without Frontiers directive is a blow to the likes of Mr Rupert Murdoch, the media tycoon who has made the acquisition of sporting events the vehicle to drive up TV subscriptions. The move indicates that the EU is now willing to regulate television, even against the opposition of major media forces.
A proposal that the so called V chip be installed in new TV sets to allow control over what children view has been deferred.
The Vchip (the V is for violence) allows parents to block violence and pornography. It works in conjunction with a programme classification system, such as that for films.
MEPs have been concerned at the growth of TV in Europe, from 90 channels in 1990 to well over 400 today and growing almost daily. They feel governments are powerless to do, anything about standards, especially the growing amount of pornography used to attract viewers in an increasingly crowded and competitive market.
The V chip system has been adopted in the US, but there is no evidence that it is the solution some MEPs had hoped for. The EU Commission has managed to long finger this issue. A study is to review the advantages and disadvantages of the chip.
The progress of Television Without Frontiers has become a story worthy of a television drama.
Two years ago the French presidency said the renewal of the directive was a chance to put in place a permanent projection for European culture by insisting on a quota for European television stations. The French wanted St per cent of programmes shown on any television channel to be European made. Others, including the Germans and the British, objected. The Danes said quotas were for fish, not television.
The renewal of the directive dragged on during the Spanish and Italian presidencies. Finally the Irish presidency sent it to conciliation, from where it has just emerged.
The lofty notions of the French of two years ago have been replaced by pragmatism. The quota regime, initially supported by the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht, Mr Higgins - no longer exists: In many ways that which will be ratified by the European Parliament this week is very much what was in place before. The quota system proposed by the French and supported by many MPs has been replaced by a wording that says Europe's television services must provide 51 percent of European programmes where practicable". That was the wording in the old directive which the French opposed.
The Dublin MEP, Ms Mary Banotti has welcomed the new directive, saying it would also be welcomed by RTE as the only possible compromise.
Ms Banotti, vice chairwoman of, the Parliament's Cultural Committee, said she was sympathetic to the French view but there was an element of hypocrisy. When the French went to the cinema, they mostly watched US films.
The Department of Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht was vitally important in getting the directive through, she said, and Mr Higgins, despite his earlier support for the French position, placed reality" when involved in the negotiations.
The culture and media spokeswoman of the socialist group, Ms Carole Tongue, a fierce defender of the quota proposal, has accepted the amended directive. "At least we have a directive. It did look at one stage as if it might be dropped altogether." Mr Peter Pex, a Dutch Christian Democrat MEP, is chairman of the parliament's culture committee and an opponent of quotas. The wording agreed at conciliation means no one need apply a quota at all. "I am glad there is no real quota. Television stations can apply it where possible." The French view on TV Without Frontiers is that it is a weapon to fight US cultural expansion into Europe. This caused panic within the independent television industry. Over the past two years, commercial television companies have run one of the biggest campaigns ever to convince MEPs of the error of the French view.
Ms Tongue claims, one proposal, lost at conciliation, would have provided £300 million for European film production from the largest six media companies in Europe alone. This was by way of a levy on theme channels.
Mr Pex has said quotas do not stimulate, but act as a sleeping pill. Like other anti interventionists he favours a guarantee fund to assist investment, in the film industry. Ms Banotti agrees, saying quotas on television cannot be the way to help the film industry.
Mr Pex says European film will be more successful in its own market if distribution within the EU is improved. With the world changing so fast, the EU should, begin on a successor to the directive straight away.
But if Ms Tongue and Mr Pex disagree on most issues, the agree on one point. Support for public service broadcasting must be included in the revised EU treaty. This will allow state funding to continue without challenge.