Brussels, 30/01/2008 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday 29 January, MEPs on the industry, research and energy committee gave a somewhat lukewarm welcome to the new electronic communications regulatory framework, better known as the “telecom package” proposed by the European Commission. There was general reticence towards what to MEPs appeared huge reform of a framework that worked well and which, in the words of Angelika Niebler (EPP-ED, Germany) needed only a “few adjustments”. MEPs were also concerned by the lack of time given them to make an in-depth assessment of a very sensitive issue (Commissioner Reding hopes for an agreement under French Presidency: Ed.). The pan-European telecoms authority, in particular, raised much criticism, with MEPs fearing a loss of power for national authorities and an increase for the Commission.
Director General of DG Information Society Fabio Colasanti defended the reform brought forward by Commissioner Viviane Reding on 13 November 2007 (see EUROPE 9540) and 9542). He said that, with the creation of a pan-European telecoms authority, the Commission was seeking more consistency on the 27 national markets by virtue of having a single approach and the same kind of sanctions for similar failures. He also spoke of the needed relaunch of competition in some segments. For this, the Commission had opted for a reduction in the number of markets affected by the ex-ante legislation and for a strengthening of the rules on the remaining markets. “Regulation must be more effective and more concentrated,” Colasanti said.
The rapporteur, French Socialist MEP Catherine Trautmann, was at pains to set out to the Commission the difficulty that Parliament had in giving proper consideration to a reform which involved so many different players and sectors, with some controversial proposals and others on which there was more consensus, within the set timescale. She asked the Commission, with regard to the new pan-European authority, how it intended to handle possible questions of competence with national regulators (NRAs). It had to be guaranteed that this new authority would be as independent as the 27 NRAs of their governments, added Giles Chichester (EPP-ED, UK), and he said that the foundations that were already there should be built on. “Who is guaranteeing the independence of the new agency?” asked Pilar del Castillo Vera (EPP-ED, Spain). The independence of the Authority, if indeed it ever came into being, must be guaranteed, agreed Herbert Reul (EPP-ED, Germany). Alexander Alvaro (ALDE, Germany) was worried by a possible concentration of power in the hands of the Commission: “To what extent has the subsidiarity principle been taken into account with regard to this authority? Why create an authority at European level when things are working well at national level?” he wondered. Francisca Pleguezuelos Aguilar (PES, Spain) shared these concerns, speaking even of “breaking the balance with the member states”. Only Patrizia Toia (ALDE, Italy) was not hostile to the proposal: “A European authority seems to me to be something positive”. Functional separation - separating the transmission infrastructure from content - is another controversial area in the Commission's proposal, and also raised a number of questions. Toia asked the Commission what impact study had been carried out on this issue. An in-depth “costs-benefits” analysis was needed, she noted. Niebler wondered if functional separation in the telecoms sector was as necessary as in the energy sector, arguing that the telecoms sector was much more competitive. Were market forces not enough to create competition, wondered Reul. “Do not dismiss functional separation,” however, pleaded Chichester, arguing that “The change may be good”. Spectrum management was the third point discussed. Niebler backed the Commission with regard to rationalising the use of the spectrum, as long as broadcasters were not left on the sidelines, and Toia did not see why only operators should have the right to share out frequencies. “Sharing out the spectrum must remain in the hands of member states,” said Alvaro, and he asked the Commission what, apart from mobile television, were to be the “new services” which required such a policy change. Responding to MEPs' concerns, Colassanti said he was “concerned about the idea being given about centralising powers”. Apart from the creation of a new pan-European authority, which was to increase cooperation among NRAs and resolve technological issues, there was no move whatsoever towards increasing the powers of the Commission, he said, noting that a number of member states had been thinking about such an authority for some time. It was not a matter to be taken lightly, and the Commission had to give its approval; it was about creating equality of opportunity in member states, so that there were no inconsistencies, he added.
The telecom package is a matter for co-decision and the Council of Ministers, at the last Telecoms Council on 29 November 2007, has already had a first exchange of views. (I.L.)