Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on: the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Towards a new framework for electronic communications infrastructure and associated services — the 1999 Communications Review
C 226/56 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 8. 2000 Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on: — the ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions’, on the ‘Fifth Report on the implementation of the Telecommunications Regulatory Package’, and — the ‘Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Towards a new framework for electronic communications infrastructure and associated services — the 1999 Communications Review’ (2000/C 226/15) THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Fifth Report on the Implementation of the Telecommunications Regulatory Package’, (COM(1999) 537 final) and the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social the Regions on ‘Towards a new framework for Electronic Committee and the Committee of Communications infrastructure and associated services — The 1999 Communications Review’, (COM(1999) 539 final); having regard to the decision by the Commission on 15 November 1999, acting under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult the Committee of the Regions on the matter; having regard to the decision taken by its bureau on 2 June 1999 to instruct Commission 3 for Trans- European Networks, Transport and Information Society to prepare an opinion on the subject; having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 520/99 rev. 1) adopted by Commission 3 on 4 February 2000 (rapporteur: Mr Koivisto FIN, PSE), adopted the following opinion at its 33rd plenary session on 12-13 April 2000 (session of 13 April). 1. The purpose of the communications b) Towards a new framework for Electronic Communications infrastructure and associated services a) The Fifth Report on the Implementation of the Telecommuni- cations Regulatory Package 1. 1. The communication — examines the implementation of existing telecommuni- cations regulations in the Community; — analyses how national regulations are implemented in practice; — provides an overview of the development of telecommuni- cations markets; — summarises the main obstacles to the implementation of the single market; — provides starting points for the review of the entire regulatory framework for communications, but telecom- munications in particular. The communication presents a review of EU regulation 1. 2. in telecommunications, and proposes the main elements for a new framework for communications infrastructure and associated services. 2. The opinion of the Committee of the Regions; the general situation with regard to telecommunications markets The Committee of the Regions agrees with the general 2. 1. policy objectives presented by the Commission, the principles behind regulatory action, and the structure of the new regulatory framework. In particular, the Committee of the Regions endorses the Commission’s view that the new frame- work must seek to increase competition in all market segments, particularly at local and regional level. 8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 226/57 2. 2. The Committee of the Regions also agrees with the principles underlying the two communications, namely that the new regulatory framework should be designed to cater for new, dynamic and largely unpredictable markets with many more players than at present. 2. 3. Like the Commission, the Committee of the Regions wishes to stress that the new framework must be much more flexible than before and broader in scope in order to be able to adapt to rapid and unpredictable technological and market changes, which have an impact on all other sectors of society. areas which, on account of their market structure, require a different approach. For example, various local authorities across Europe — the best and most widely known example probably being the city of Stockholm — have, through their own efforts or by other means, acquired an often quite extensive broadband telecommunications cable network, which has then been available in practice for network equip- ment and services to all businesses. In such cases, although in one respect a kind of monopoly prevails, the common European objectives are generally achieved more effectively from the point of view of the user with regard to the breadth of service provision and value for money than in the competition situations envisaged by the two communications. 2. 4. The Committee of the Regions commends the fact that the Fifth Report takes the regional dimension into account more clearly when considering the consequences of legislation on service access and pricing. 2. 8. In view of the situation described above, the Committee of the Regions hopes that the Commission will seek to make a clearer market distinction between cable and other equivalent infrastructure services on the one hand, and actual consumer services on the other. 2. 5. The Committee of the Regions wishes to draw the Commission’s attention to the fact that, in many Member States, the regional competition described in the Fifth Report is, in practice, purely theoretical and in reality, particularly in the most remote regions, services are provided by a single company. The Committee of the Regions is concerned at the rapidly widening disparities between regions and considers that a universal service and other similar mechanisms are excessively slow instruments for rectifying the situation in rapidly evolving markets. 2. 5 (a) Existing research confirms that there is a clear link between concentrations of economic activity and the establishment of telecommunications networks. Telecom- munications infrastructure is thus one of the elements of competition in attracting enterprises. It also follows that in all likelihood differences do not exist — or will not arise — solely between EU regions; they will also occur within regions. Account should be taken of these factors in the formulation of EU telecommunications policy as they have important implications for social and economic cohesion in the EU Member States. Furthermore, regional and local authorities should be careful to take measures to establish the right conditions with regard to the establishment of telecommuni- cations networks, insofar as such measures come within their powers. future The Committee of the Regions hopes that 2. 6. reports on implementing telecommunications markets might consider actual operators located in various parts of the EU and in different regions with different service needs, in order to establish just how effective competition really is. 3. The opinion of the Committee of the Regions; pro- posals for new regulatory principles 3. 1. Licensing and authorisations 3. 1. 1. authorisations outlined in the communication. The regions support the principles on licensing and 3. 2. Access and interconnection In line with the above, the Committee of the Regions 3. 2. 1. is doubtful as to whether the proposed measures can achieve the general EU information society policy objectives suf- ficiently quickly and would prefer to see a clearer market separation between infrastructure and services. 3. 2. 2. The Committee of the Regions feels it is important that all mobile operators, and not just those with a major market position, are subject to the obligations relating to the freedom of choice of operator. 2. 7. The Committee of the Regions agrees with the Com- mission’s view on the need for a broader regulatory basis for the communications sector, but wishes to emphasise that elsewhere within the field of telecommunications there are The Committee of the Regions has no comments to 3. 3. 1. make on the Commission position on management of radio frequency. 3. 3. Management of radio frequency C 226/58 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 8. 2000 3. 4. Universal service 3. 6. Numbering, naming and addressing 3. 4. 1. The Committee of the Regions wishes to draw the Commission’s attention in particular to the fact that free competition in telecommunications does not bring equal benefits to all regions or to all local districts within regions. In addition, the rapid evolution in markets and technologies has merely served to exacerbate these differences, as new services tend to be concentrated in areas with a sufficiently large volume of customers. The aim of universal services is to provide universal access to the information society. The Committee of the Regions therefore feels that the positions presented in the communication must be regularly monitored with regard to actual results, and constantly, pro-actively revised in order to guarantee truly universal access. At the same time we must guarantee, inter alia, the social, cultural and economic development of the sparsely populated areas and influence population stabilisation. Contrary to the Commission’s position, the Com- 3. 4. 2. mittee of the Regions feels it is important to include broadband services within the scope of existing universal services, at least as a political objective. Inter alia this would achieve the aim of ensuring that the most disadvantaged regions, or at least part of them, would not remain unconnected to the new technologies. Otherwise they would lag even further behind the potentially more developed regions, since they would either lack advanced telecom services or would secure them too late. 3. 4. 3. The Committee of the Regions also wishes to draw the Commission’s attention to the fact that users in every region have very different needs (for example, schools, health care, different kinds of companies and citizens). Effective universal service criteria should also take account of users with unusual needs. 3. 4. 4. In addition to developing a universal service, the Committee of the Regions feels that serious consideration should be given to rapidly targeting resources, including EU funding opportunities, towards local authorities and other local and regional players responsible for general infrastructure provision, so that they can, if necessary, put in place the necessary broadband infrastructure in their own regions and make it available to different kinds of service provider. Naturally, particular attention should be paid in this respect to those regions where the market does not function correctly and funding should be provided to counter this shortfall, so as to put them on an equal footing with other regions when it comes to playing this new role. 3. 5. The interests of users and consumers The Committee of the Regions hopes that number 3. 6. 1. portability can also be introduced as quickly as possible between fixed and mobile communication networks. 3. 7. Specific competition issues The Committee of the Regions endorses clarification 3. 7. 1. of the concepts of ‘significant market power’ and ‘dominant position’. However, in general the situation with regard to market position changes decisively when the focus is shifted from the European or national level to the regional and local one. The Committee of the Regions feels that, in essence, it should also be possible to apply the regulations on dominant market position in those cases where individual consumers only have a single option for purchasing an important communication service. 3. 8. Institutional issues 3. 8. 1. In view of the convergence taking place between different fields of communications and telecommunications, the Committee of the Regions considers the Commission proposal on the Communications Committee to be appropri- ate. Indeed, the capability should be there to rapidly expand the activities of both the Committee and the High Level Group, if the fields converge faster than expected in the future. The Committee of the Regions agrees with the Commission view that no real added value would be achieved by setting up a European regulatory authority. The Committee of the Regions believes that the 3. 8. 2. independence of national regulatory authorities is essential, as the transition from the former state monopolies to open competition is still ongoing in many Member States. 4. Summary The Committee of the Regions: — The Committee of the Regions agrees with the general policy objectives presented by the Commission, the prin- ciples behind regulatory action, and the structure of the new regulatory framework. In particular, the Committee of the Regions endorses the Commission’s view that the new framework must seek to increase competition in all market segments, particularly at local level. 3. 5. 1. The Committee of the Regions wishes to draw the Commission’s attention to the importance of ensuring privacy protection in operations employing the latest mobile phone technologies. — The Committee feels that the views on the universal service presented in the Communication must be applied actively and on an ongoing basis in order to ensure the relevant access. 8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 226/59 — In addition to developing a universal service, the Com- mittee feels that serious consideration should be given to rapidly targeting resources, including EU funding oppor- tunities, towards local authorities and other local and regional players responsible for general infrastructure provision, so that they can, if necessary, put in place the necessary broadband infrastructure in their own regions and make it available to different kinds of service provider. — The Committee endorses clarification of the concepts of ‘significant market power’ and ‘dominant position’. However, in general the situation with regard to market position changes decisively when the focus is shifted from the European or national level to the regional and local one. The Committee of the Regions feels that, in essence, it should also be possible to apply the regulations on dominant market position in those cases where individual consumers only have a single option for purchasing an important communication service. — The Committee draws the Commission’s attention to the importance of ensuring privacy protection in operations employing the latest mobile phone technologies. — The Committee hopes that number portability can be introduced as quickly as possible between fixed and mobile communication networks. Brussels, 13 April 2000. The President of the Committee of the Regions Jos CHABERT