Luxemburg, 07/06/2007 (Agence Europe) - Liberalisation of postal services in Europe was not allowed a public debate on Thursday 7 June at a meeting of European telecommunications ministers, unlike what happened under Finnish presidency in December 2006 (see EUROPE 9325). It is true that no particular breakthrough was expected in Luxemburg (see EUROPE 9432). The German presidency preferred to avoid all public deliberation and to tackle this thorny and far from settled issue over an informal lunch. It appears, then, that 2009 will not be the deadline for fully opening up to competition the final bastion of historic operation - delivery of mail of less than 50 grammes (see EUROPE 9289). German Federal Economy and Technology Minister Michael Gloss said that “bilateral meetings” between heads of state and government could take place on the sidelines of the European Summit of 21-22 June.
Mr Gloss said that member states had spoken freely and, of course, had taken up somewhat different positions: Germany, on the one hand, had adopted a law providing for full liberalisation of the postal sector by 2008, while, on the other hand, there was the rather uncompetitive economy in some recent member states which meant they could not act in such a short deadline. Mr Glos, however, felt that member states all agreed that opening the postal sector to competition was in the interests of both the sector and users. He said, “The train is moving towards liberalisation. Some want a TGV, others a little train. We have to make sure the train keeps moving with air conditioning!”
On the possible date for full liberalisation, Mr Glos felt that Markus Ferber (EPP-ED, Germany, EP rapporteur of this issue, had made a very good proposal in suggesting opening up the postal sector in 2011, and 2013 for the new member states and those EU countries where geographical conditions - notably with islands - are difficult (see EUROPE 9433). “It is, therefore, quite reasonable to speak about 2009 to 2011,” said Mr Glos, and he was not against countries opening up their markets on different dates. He could even agree to “Luxemburg not liberalising until 2013”, though such a possibility for France seemed a little more delicate to him.
On the problem of funding the universal postal service (UPS), he acknowledged that there were parts of the postal market that were barely viable, and he used the example of “isolated islands” or mail that had to be taken right to “the farmer's wife in her village”. In a fully competitive environment, how could these non-viable segments be funded. Mr Gloss said that Internal Market Commissioner Charlie McCreevy (who was not present at the press conference) had spoken of options which would guarantee competition and ensure that people can benefit from not too expensive services. Finally, Mr Gloss warned against completing the postal market to the detriment of the workers. The cost of services provision, he said, must not be exploitation of workers.
“We want the funding arrangements for the universal service, which is a key part of spatial planning and social cohesion to be determined permanently, legibly and simply, and we want it done by September,” said French Economy, Finance and Employment Minister Jean-Louis Borloo before the ministerial lunch. “We want a sustainable universal service, properly funded. It's in everybody's interests,” he went on. He said it was essential to discuss these arrangements first of all, before talking about a date for postal liberalisation, which he felt was of secondary importance. Luxemburg Communications Minister Jean-Louis Schilz said his country's position was close to France's; “13 or 14 countries agree with 2009” but “a majority” of member states had problems with “the planned funding rules,” he said. That the Commission had acknowledged that the options for funding the universal postal service in its legislative proposal were not exhaustive was, he said, “a call for reflection”. Italian Telecommunications Minister Paulo Genbtiloni spoke of “a block of countries which, like Italy, were asking for clearer legal guarantees on the funding of the universal service”. “Italy does not want liberalisation of the market, then, after a few years, a flood of state aid (infringement) procedures,” he added.
In its progress report, the German presidency felt that within the Council working party “significant progress” had been made on the following parts of the draft directive: “the continuation of a high-quality universal service …, the authorisation conditions for postal services undertakings, rules for the approval of postal services providers, the provision of information on the universal service, access to the postal infrastructure, pricing principles, transparency of accounts and the guarantee of a complaints procedure for postal services users and providers”. (mb)