Brussels, 26/05/2016 (Agence Europe) - Better regulation, better regulation, better regulation! This phrase was on the lips of all of the member states at the 'Competitiveness' Council on Thursday 26 May. They oppose the creation of new rules or new structures in the framework of the future reform of the framework on telecommunications.
“In certain cases, no regulation is the best possible regulation”, Finland started off by saying. The first country to take the floor, it summed up the point of view of the 14 member states who wrote on Tuesday to the Dutch Presidency of the Council of the EU to stress the importance of 'smart' regulation for the telecommunications sector (see EUROPE 11557). On 21 September, the European Commission is to present its areas of work to ensure more effective coordination of the radio-electric spectrum, create incentives for investment in ultra-fast broadband and to ensure fair competition conditions for all market players.
During the table round, most of the ministers opposed the creation of a new European body. The Finnish, Lithuanian, Swedish, Hungarian, Slovenian and Portuguese ministers, however, supported better coordination of the spectrum through the existing Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG). Sweden, more specifically, put forward the idea of a non-binding notification system, whilst Slovenia suggested an annual workshop for an exchange of views.
On the tricky issue of 'over-the-top players' (OTT), all ministers called for a fairer regulatory environment. Sweden and Germany said that it would be better to get rid of the current rules weighing down traditional operators then to extend these rules to the OTTs. Latvia also opposed specific rules on platforms and Estonia stressed that the current rules should not be extended to OTTs. Germany and France called for intervention “where necessary”. “France wants fair conditions, which is not currently the case. We need to bring in a principle of fairness and transparency”, said the French minister, Axelle Lemaire. “We need an update of the definitions so that OTTs and others are subject to the same obligations”, argued Portugal. Finally, Germany and Greece asked to keep in place the universal service obligations, whilst France called for these to be dusted off, by extending them to the Internet. At the moment, only landlines, telephone boxes and telephone directories are covered by these obligations.
Agreement on UHT and portability. It came as no surprise, but progress is progress: the Council reached a political agreement on to compromise texts prepared by the Dutch Presidency.
The first of these texts covers the use of the ultra high-frequency (UHT) band (470-790 MHz) within the EU (see EUROPE 11553). The Council's position takes up the essence of the Commission's proposal, specifically to assign the 'golden frequencies' (694-790 MHz) to mobile telephony services between now and 30 June 2020 and to ensure access to traditional television services in the frequency range of below 700 MHz (470-694 MHz). However, it brings in greater flexibility: the member states will have a maximum of two years to allocate the golden frequency range to mobile services and they will have until 2018, rather than 2017, to adopt national roadmaps. Similarly, the agreement sets a limit of 2020 on the privileged access for audiovisual services to the frequencies below 700 MHz (470-694 MHz). “Ideally, we would like to reach agreement at first reading before the end of this year”, commented the competent Commissioner, Günther Oettinger. “The Commission can be flexible over the 2020 objective: 2022 is better than nothing at all”, he concluded.
The text is available at: http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8793-2016-INIT/en/pdf
The second text concerns the cross-border portability of online content services in the single market. It aims to allow subscribers to online content - such as music or films - or those who have purchased content of this kind to access it not only in their country of residence, but also if they visit another member state. It also applies to free services, if they so wish. The Council orientation states that this mechanism will apply to subscribers in member states other than their country of residence “for a limited period of time”. As regards the verification framework, the compromise states (in an article, rather than a recital, as was previously the case) that rights-holders will be allowed to authorise access and use of their content without the state of residence of the subscriber being verified by the operator. Readers may recall that the place of residence may be identified through the eight specific criteria, but which are not cumulative (invoice address, postal address, bank data, IP address, and so on).
The text is available at: http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8939-2016-INIT/en/pdf . (Original in French by Sophie Petitjean)