Doslovný zápis z rozpráv

Štvrtok, 24. októbra 2013 - Štrasburg

6. Elektronické komunikácie - Nedávne návrhy na dobudovanie jednotného digitálneho trhu (rozprava)

  Elnök. − A következő napirendi pont a Catherine Trautmann által az Ipari, Kutatási és Energiaügyi Bizottság nevében készített, az elektronikus hírközlésről szóló jelentésről folytatott vita (2013/2080(INI)) (A7-0313/2013)

A következő pont a Giles Chichester által az Európai Konzervatívok és Reformerek Képviselőcsoportja nevében a Bizottsághoz intézett, a digitális egységes piac kiépítésére vonatkozó közelmúltbeli javaslatokról szóló szóbeli választ igénylő kérdésről folytatott vita (O-000109/2013 - 2013/2892(RSP) - B7-0523/2013)

  Catherine Trautmann, rapporteure. − Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, le débat de ce matin s'intègre parfaitement dans l'actualité.

La Commission européenne vient de publier une nouvelle proposition. Le Conseil européen discutera, cet après-midi, de pistes pour un marché unique du numérique. Mon rapport a été élaboré avant ce nouveau texte, mais l'unanimité dont il a bénéficié lors du vote en commission de l'industrie, de la recherche et de la technologie en a validé tant la méthode que le fond. Je m'en réjouis car le Parlement aura exprimé sa voix.

Nous le savons, le numérique est l'un des principaux vecteurs de croissance. Nous attendions du paquet Telecom et de sa transposition qu'ils accélèrent les investissements réalisés par le secteur. Nous n'avons pas eu entière satisfaction sur ce point. Bien sûr, la transposition du paquet a pris plus de temps que prévu. Elle était fixée à mai 2011, mais le dernier État membre ne l'a achevée qu'en janvier 2013. Là n'est cependant pas la seule raison de notre insatisfaction.

C'est donc autour de ce constat général que s'articule mon rapport. J'y dresse un bilan entre les objectifs du paquet et les faits, en essayant de tirer les enseignements sur ce qui pourrait être amélioré. J'y mentionne un certain nombre de points qui ont fonctionné, tel que le mécanisme de corégulation, qui a permis d'améliorer la cohérence réglementaire intraeuropéenne, mais aussi, et c'est là toute l'importance de ce rapport, d'autres éléments qu'il faudrait modifier.

Je pense à l'harmonisation en matière de fréquences, à une meilleure coordination dans les calendriers d'attribution des licences ou encore à d'autres sujets que nous appelons de nos vœux depuis bien longtemps déjà, comme la question de l'inclusion du haut débit dans le service universel. La Commission nous avait promis d'avancer une proposition sur ce point lors des négociations sur le paquet en 2009. Nous sommes en 2013 et, pour l'instant, je n'ai rien vu venir. Je pense que nous aurions pu nous appuyer sur ces bases, saisir les occasions que le cadre donne, comme l'identification des marchés transnationaux, une première étape vers le fameux marché unique numérique. La Commission a préféré une autre stratégie et a publié cette nouvelle proposition de règlement sur laquelle, selon ses termes, les colégisateurs sont tenus d'arriver à un résultat avant la fin de la législature.

Mais, Madame la Commissaire, sans obérer la situation difficile dans laquelle nous nous trouvons, nous avons besoin de temps pour consulter et débattre afin d'éviter de légiférer à l'emporte-pièce et de garantir une cohérence juridique pour les acteurs du secteur. Le remède ne doit pas être pire que le mal. En effet, nos acteurs européens dans le numérique ont certes besoin d'être stimulés, mais ils ont surtout besoin de stabilité, de visibilité et surtout pas d'un regain de complexité avec, sous couvert de simplification, la création d'un système assez complexe d'autorisations uniques dont la valeur ajoutée reste encore à démontrer, si j'en crois mes premières consultations.

Le devoir, mais aussi le privilège de la Commission est de proposer et non pas d'imposer. Or, nous nous sentons, il faut le dire, mis sous pression pour obtenir un résultat coûte que coûte. C'est la raison pour laquelle je souscris en grande partie à la question de mon collègue Chichester.

Un autre exemple: depuis 2009, nous attendions une législation contraignante sur la neutralité de l'internet. Nous pourrions nous féliciter que ce thème soit présent dans la proposition, mais nous attendions de la Commission qu'elle apporte des réponses, qu'elle clarifie les définitions, qu'elle donne les garanties nécessaires. En l'occurrence, tout porte à croire que nous avons affaire à une belle architecture, mais dont la pierre angulaire, la définition de ce qu'un utilisateur peut attendre de son accès au best effort internet serait encore instable. Il y a de bonnes choses, le spectre par exemple, mais cela ne suffit pas. Bien sûr, nous avons besoin d'initiatives, mais il nous faut aussi la perspective.

Côté Parlement, nous sommes pragmatiques. Il ne s'agit pas d'avoir une réflexion philosophique. Nous sommes tous convaincus des bienfaits d'un marché unique, mais la question est de proposer les bons outils pour créer un véritable effet de levier. Il ne me semble ainsi pas possible de réviser la réglementation en six mois mais nous pouvons mettre à profit cette période qui nous sépare des élections pour élaborer un canevas solide dont le prochain Parlement pourra se saisir.

  Giles Chichester, author. − Mr President, it is very good to see the Commissioner here this morning, but it would have been even better if we could have met before the proposal was put.

It is not common for EU institutions to criticise each other, let alone for one department to criticise another within the same institution. Yet we have the European Parliament Impact Assessment Unit criticising the Commission, and the Commission Impact Assessment Board criticising the Commission’s impact assessment, not once but three times. Not only that, but we have a paper from the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) pointing to many flaws in this Commission proposal, including such sins as unnecessary complexity and greater legal uncertainty; no consultation and analysis; misleading, inaccurate comparisons with the USA; no reference to the dynamics of next generation networks; citing market fragmentation in Europe with no evidence that innovation or investment has been hindered; insufficient recognition of BEREC progress towards regulatory harmonisation (they would say that, of course); no specific assessment of the impact on SMEs; and so on and so forth. Then we have the commentary by Rewheel, which debunks the idea that European consumers are worse off than US citizens on cost, use of mobile data and network speeds – not quite what the Commission tells us in order to justify this proposal.

Of more concern are the sneaky transfers of sovereignty from Member States to the Commission in the fields of authorisation, spectrum harmonisation and net neutrality. Member States: you have been warned!

In short, this seems like nothing so much as a vanity project of legacy legislation, tackling too many things and trying to run before it can walk. Many answers are needed.

  Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, Catherine Trautmann beats me on experience in this House, although I beat her on age. Taking that into account, I thank her from my heart for her report. I do not mean that I necessarily agree with everything in it, but it is solid. It is also clear that we share much, and that is important in a debate.

We agree that tomorrow’s growth is digital: no doubt about that. We agree that economic growth and job creation require high-speed programmes: no misunderstanding about that. Ms Trautmann and I could not agree more closely on these things, and we agree that what we need are not fragmented national markets but rather a single, unified and competitive market. Heads of State and Government are discussing this issue later today, and I hope that they hear our message loud and clear.

Let me address some points in the report. Number one: I note the call for a full review of the framework, a call made clearly, not only in the report but also earlier. Indeed, on 11 September 2013, we set out how we are preparing such a review. It is not an easy task, but we have set out what the review will cover: namely, enhancing consistency; a single regulator for a level playing field; and convergence. Let there be no mistake, however: the review will take some time, and we cannot wait that long before taking action. The question is: are we aware of the situation in the sector? If we are, then my position is that we cannot delay, for whatever reason. With the economy where it is – and we all regret that it is in such bad shape – and with technology where it is, and the rest of the world marching on quickly, this is a competitive game. It is a global scene.

Secondly, Mr President, let me reassure you that we are not taking a piecemeal approach. Our measures deliberately target the most important single-market barriers and will remove them. What is at stake is the creation of a real single market. At the risk of repeating myself, I have to ask: when we are so proud of our single market, is it not strange that one very important economic sector should be excluded from that market? Electronic communication is not, nowadays, something separate. It is integrated with all areas of economic activity, and this is about jointly creating a tipping point so that the market can evolve to become a true, pan-European single market. Who is against that? It is also about complementing the existing framework.

Ultimately, our goal is to make this a ‘normal’ economic sector, one that needs only limited ex ante rules. If market players recognise the opportunity this represents, then this package will take us a long way – I am certain even Mr Chichester will agree on that – and without harming competition or consumer choice. In fact, we are promoting competition, harmony and consumer choice. In an open, competitive single market with fewer barriers, companies will succeed only by offering the best deals at the lowest prices. That is competition, and I would claim to know something about competition, given my previous portfolio.

Thirdly, on institutional issues: our proposal strengthens the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC). I repeat: it strengthens BEREC, it does not weaken it. We intend to strengthen BEREC with a permanent and independent chair, and I would emphasise the word ‘independent’. This proposal is not about taking power to Brussels; I am the last person to be in favour of that. Parliament gets a say, of course. It is part of our proposal that Parliament will be involved in the appointment of the chair.

The fourth issue is net neutrality. For the first time, across Europe, our proposal guarantees access to an open internet with no more blocking, no more slowing down and no more discrimination. Specialised services are needed for innovations such as e-health and business-critical cloud computing, but these will be allowed only under tight constraints. In particular, they cannot be a substitute for the internet, nor may they impair the internet for others. There are clear legal safeguards here: new monitoring and enforcement powers and clearer contracts to guarantee consumers internet speed and quality.

Fifthly, delays in spectrum licensing are partly to blame for today’s fragmented mobile markets, and we badly need a new approach on coordination across Europe. I am glad we are on the same page about this, but let me be clear: what we are talking about is coordination, not transferring responsibilities. The Member States and the national authorities will, of course, advise and will be involved in decision-making, and the additional administrative burden will be minimal. The Commission has no wish to intervene except where that is absolutely necessary.

Lastly, there are also new consumer rights: on contracts, transparency and switching – badly-needed rights, by the way – and that helps consumers, helps providers to expand across borders, taking advantage of our single market, and strengthens competition. We took the decision – and I am still grateful to those founders of Europe who took it – to be one family, for better or for worse, and with regard to this economic activity, it is of course far more challenging to have a single market rather than 28 individual ring-fenced markets. We are all aware of the many benefits that these reforms can bring.

Our common aim remains a more competitive Europe, with pervasive broadband underpinning a vibrant digital single market. I sincerely hope that I can count on your support, Mr President, to deliver this gift before the end of the Parliamentary term.

I think I have answered the substance of the points you raised, Mr Chichester. I look forward to our debate and to hearing Parliament’s views on the crucial issues.

  Malcolm Harbour, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection. − Mr President, I am very pleased to be here this morning, on behalf of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, because we worked very closely with Catherine Trautmann to add a number of important elements to her initial report, in particular about users’ rights.

I would just remind you that my committee has had a consistent record, first of all in championing the single market – we need no lessons about that – but particularly because of the real importance of consumer rights and offering consumers that vital information – the ability to switch providers, and understanding the quality of service and any restrictions that may be applied to it, which are vital for the single market.

Our argument is that we have advanced significantly in that respect, particularly with the reforms that my committee added in 2009. The Commissioner talked about contract terms. We added significantly to the Commission’s original proposal in 2009, and we do not need any further lessons about that. I would say to the Commissioner – because, in a way, we are talking about her new proposal – that my committee and my shadows have met already, and we are very disturbed about the fact that you have gone for fully-harmonised regulation.

I see that the Prime Ministers agree with us on the need for more flexibility. We need to do a lot of work on this proposal, but we would have made much more significant progress if you had sent it to us as an amendment to our existing directive.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  Andreas Schwab (PPE), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Herr Präsident! Ich hoffe, dass mein Kollege Hökmark, der eigentlich für die EVP spricht, es mir nicht übelnimmt, dass ich eine Nachfrage an den Kollegen Harbour stellen möchte. Frau Kollegin Trautmann hat eben in ihrer Einleitung darauf hingewiesen, dass sie eigentlich eine Gesetzgebung zur Netzneutralität erwartet. Frau Kroes ihrerseits hat gesagt, dass die Netzneutralität nunmehr geregelt sei mit dem Vorschlag der Kommission, und Sie, Herr Kollege Harbour, haben für den Binnenmarktausschuss gesagt, dass die Universaldienstleistungsrichtlinie eigentlich schon Regelungen für die Netzneutralität enthält. Könnten Sie vielleicht noch einmal deutlich machen, was Sie damit gemeint haben?

  Malcolm Harbour (ECR), blue-card answer. – Yes, certainly, I was involved in drafting the provisions in 2009 about quality of service and giving the regulators the ability to intervene if they saw that service quality was being used in an anti-competitive way, and indeed if operators had already blocked, restricted or throttled services in a discriminatory way. BEREC, the regulators, have already told the Commissioner that they feel they have powers to deal with the net neutrality problems that are currently emerging.

I think that the problem that we will look at closely in the Commissioner’s new proposal is whether she is trying to anticipate potential problems as opposed to dealing with existing problems. It is not the philosophy of telecom legislation to try and anticipate problems but to allow the market to work, as she would agree.

  Gunnar Hökmark, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, first of all I should like to thank the rapporteur and the Commissioner. I think it is striking that the sector we are discussing today is, on the one hand, characterised by extremely complex and slow administrative procedures and, on the other hand, that there are extremely rapid and dynamic developments in it. That means that we need to look ahead to the coming ten years more than we need to look back over the last five or three years.

Secondly – and this is crucial – we need to fight fragmentation. It is a paradox that, in these varying mobile and global markets, we in the European Union have more fragmentation than in nearly any other sector of our economy. I think we need to focus on opportunities for achieving transnational European markets, transnational operators, and the benefits for consumers of having those. I think it is fair to say that here we have the impact assessment of reality – not from any bureaucratic department or division, but we have the impact assessment from reality, because the reality is that Europe is lagging behind. It is of crucial importance for us to speed up, because otherwise we will lag behind more and more. The things we do not do today will mean that we lag behind even more tomorrow. That is why we need to ensure that we can deal with difficult spectrum issues, the 700 MHz band, and the transnational perspective.

We need to ensure that we in Europe can have the highest speeds, not the old-fashioned speeds of the digital agenda. We need to be better than that, and we need to make use of the fact that we now have a recovery. No other area provides such good investment and competitiveness as these telecom sectors. That will help society as a whole. That is what we have a duty to achieve.

  Patrizia Toia, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, saluto anch'io la signora Commissario, ringraziando in modo particolare l'onorevole Trautmann, che ha saputo presentare una relazione molto esauriente ed esaustiva nell'analisi della situazione, dell'applicazione della legislazione e che fornisce anche molti spunti per le azioni che dovremo compiere nei prossimi mesi e le scelte che dovremo fare.

Ciò che emerge con evidenza dalla relazione e dalla discussione di oggi è che, nonostante gli sforzi regolamentari fatti dall'Unione europea, questo mercato unico delle telecomunicazioni è ancora un obiettivo, e questo forse giustifica anche un nuovo impulso, una nuova attività da svolgere, perché la situazione è ancora quella di mercati frammentati, che insieme non riescono a rendere competitivo questo settore nel continente europeo. Questa perdita di competitività l'abbiamo constatata anche recentemente con l'acquisizione di grandi realtà europee da parte di soggetti di aziende extraeuropee.

Ritengo quindi che dobbiamo lavorare molto in questa direzione, consapevoli che da questo settore può derivare un impulso a tutte le altre attività economiche che cerchiamo di rilanciare nell'Unione europea, nonché alla pubblica amministrazione, che è anche un forte retaggio per il nostro ritardo economico, nonché un'occupazione qualificata per i giovani.

Dei tanti punti citati da Catherine, ne riprendo velocemente solo due o tre. Il primo è lo spettro radio. Penso che, nonostante i risultati, un più forte coordinamento europeo avrebbe permesso un uso più efficiente, oltre che di ricavare poi da questa opportunità molto di più per gli investimenti, per nuovi servizi nelle telecomunicazioni, e anche per entrate degli Stati membri, alcuni dei quali hanno usato male l'attribuzione delle frequenze, con aste, a volte non con aste, con metodi che non erano prescritti dall'Unione europea e che hanno fatto perdere denaro e possibilità per le telecomunicazioni. Ritengo quindi che bisogna lavorare ancora in questo settore.

Il tema della neutralità della rete – che Catherine ha richiamato e che le sta molto a cuore, così come sta molto a cuore a tutti noi – per combinare diritti dei cittadini con la qualità dei servizi.

Infine, un accenno al servizio universale, che deve essere veramente attuato per colmare questo divario che c'è e anche – mi rivolgo alla ex Commissaria – alla concorrenza, anche forse per rivedere la disciplina degli aiuti di Stato e il diritto comunitario per raggiungere questo importante obiettivo del servizio universale.

  Adina-Ioana Vălean, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, I would firstly like to congratulate the rapporteur, Ms Trautmann, on her excellent report and on a fruitful discussion ahead of the Commission’s proposal.

As a Liberal, I warmly welcome the objective of the Commission proposal. Borders make no sense in relation to electronic communication, and we need – soon – to overcome the status quo of 28 national markets. Time is moving on, and we need measures to promote growth and jobs. The ICT sector is certainly one that drives our economy forward, but we have to do things right: healthy policy-making can promote investment, competition and growth, but it can also severely damage the sector if we do not work properly.

While all of us agree on the goals pursued in this regulation – an end to roaming charges, net neutrality, a single European authorisation, improved consumer protection – we should also ensure that we are sending the right message to the industry and to consumers. Part of our work must be to respond to any fears or expectations that may be voiced about predictability. The current European competition model has proved efficient: it has created many jobs and businesses and promoted growth. It can be further improved through this new package only if we succeed in adding the necessary key performance drivers, which will restart investment in this important area of economic activity.

We must promote the creation of a single telecom market and EU competitiveness at global level, but we cannot afford to create distortions in such a sensitive market. If we want to change the paradigm of the EU pro-competition model, we should not go about it in a rush. We need proper democratic debate, among ourselves and with the Council, and we need to draft a coherent piece of legislation. Therefore, I invite my colleagues to take their time, to have discussions, to consult the stakeholders and to make sure that the parliamentary outcome will be a solid one that reassures all parties as to our intentions and our means. As we know, good intentions are not always enough.

  Evžen Tošenovský, za skupinu ECR. – Vážená paní komisařko, pane předsedající, chtěl bych ocenit dlouhodobou snahu paní komisařky o posílení telekomunikačního trhu v Evropě a snahu o odstranění bariér pro jeho růst. Já také považuji za nesmyslná některá opatření, omezení, která komunikační služby prodražují nebo je administrativně omezují.

Problém vidím v načasování předloženého programu. Do konce našeho mandátu zbývá již jen několik měsíců, přičemž se jedná o velmi technicky a organizačně složitý materiál. Bylo by velkou škodou, kdyby tak důležitý záměr zůstal nedořešen z důvodu nedostatku času pro projednání v Parlamentu a v Radě. Nezbytnost investic do telekomunikací, například do širokopásmového internetu, je v současné době v Evropské unii vysoká a je zapotřebí zajistit hlavně předvídatelnost daného prostředí pro investory.

Za zásadní téma proto považuji zavedení jednotného evropského oprávnění pro celou Evropskou unii a vyřešení nebo odstranění poplatků za roaming.

  Marisa Matias, em nome do Grupo GUE/NGL. – Senhor Presidente, eu também quero começar por felicitar a relatora, concordo com a linha geral do relatório que nos propõe e também as preocupações que foram apresentadas pelo colega Chichester.

Eu entendo que a regulação das comunicações eletrónicas e das telecomunicações é provavelmente um dos setores que tem mais impacto na vida dos cidadãos e o papel da Comissão aqui ao de tentar eliminar as lacunas, simplificar, mas a Comissão deve propor e não impor. A Comissão Europeia não pode substituir os reguladores nacionais.

Concordo com as preocupações e as questões suscitadas relativamente à neutralidade da Internet, à obrigação do serviço universal, incluindo o acesso à Internet a um preço justo e ao respeito da privacidade dos utilizadores.

Nós não podemos ficar apenas chocados quando vemos, nas notícias, a Senhora Merkl a telefonar ao Senhor Obama para saber se o seu telefone esteve ou não esteve sob escuta.

A questão da privacidade é um direito fundamental de todos os cidadãos europeus e essa é mesmo uma das questões principais porque a desconfiança, e termino com isto Senhor Presidente, a desconfiança é uma das principais barreiras à verdadeira implementação de uma agenda digital e isso é tão válido para cidadãos e cidadãs, como para as empresas e, se falamos de empregos, temos de ter isso em conta.

  Pilar del Castillo Vera (PPE). - Señor Presidente, señora Comisaria, yo quiero empezar, como mis colegas, dando las gracias a Catherine Trautmann por el informe que ha presentado. Como todos sabemos, es una extraordinaria conocedora del tema, puesto que, además, fue la ponente de la Directiva sobre este tema hace ya cinco años. Yo creo que —como ella plantea— es necesaria una revisión. También creo que la revisión —como decía la Comisaria— lleva sus plazos y que —como alguien decía— en el mundo digital no hay ayer, no hay presente, solo hay mañana. Y, por tanto, hay que tener siempre la vista puesta en el futuro en esa dirección, teniendo en cuenta esa circunstancia de este sector sobre el que estamos trabajando, por lo que hay que combinar la evaluación de lo que viene ocurriendo con las normas que tenemos con los nuevos problemas que van surgiendo.

Y, en ese sentido, yo creo que se contextualiza la propuesta de la Comisión, que —ya lo hemos debatido muchas veces; yo misma lo he dicho— podría haberse hecho antes, probablemente sin ningún problema; habríamos ganado tiempo, pero las circunstancias son las que son. Y en este Parlamento, sobre todo en la Comisión de Industria, Investigación y Energía, ya hemos debatido este tema. Tenemos la determinación de seguir adelante. Seguir adelante significa que podamos llegar a aprobar en este Parlamento una posición, que naturalmente no se podrá negociar con el Consejo en esta legislatura, porque para eso sí que no hay tiempo, pero no importa, porque lo importante será fijar una posición y poder hacer luego la negociación con el Consejo.

Y una cosa más: yo no voy a entrar específicamente en cada uno de los temas, pero, en términos de tiempo, imagínense que les digamos a los ciudadanos europeos que en siete meses no tenemos tiempo de fijar una posición del Parlamento. Sería un poco ridículo. Hablamos de temas que llevamos debatiendo muchos años. No empezamos desde cero ni en espectro, ni en itinerancia, ni en neutralidad, ni en nada. Es decir, estamos hablando de temas ya muy debatidos y se trata ahora de que el Parlamento dé un impulso nuevo, para que lo que decidamos sea realmente eficiente. Ahí es donde —yo creo— tenemos que contribuir a lo que dice la Comisión.

  Sergio Gaetano Cofferati (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Signora Commissario, dell'importanza che questo settore ha – attraverso il suo sviluppo sulle altre attività economiche di questa parte del mondo – ha già detto molto bene Catherine Trautmann nella sua introduzione.

Ritengo tuttavia che abbiamo oggi due emergenze, due priorità che vanno affrontate. Lei ricorderà che nel 2000 a Lisbona, l'Europa indicò il modello di competizione basato sulla conoscenza al resto del mondo come novità nel mercato globale. Ma la conoscenza ha bisogno di essere aiutata e sostenuta. Per questa ragione, il servizio universale è una priorità. Garantire l'accesso al servizio universale vuol dire dare la possibilità a questo settore di diventare il motore della crescita economica, soprattutto di favorire la competizione alta, quella legata appunto alla conoscenza.

E poi bisogna creare il mercato interno. Il mercato interno è fondamentale per i consumatori, che hanno bisogno di certezze, di trasparenza, di sicurezze, nonché di condizioni di accesso ottimali. E ciò vale sia per gli utilizzatori, cioè i consumatori, sia per le imprese. Penso che la creazione del mercato unico sia davvero, insieme al servizio universale, la priorità della nostra azione.

  Jens Rohde (ALDE). - Hr. formand! Jeg får lyst til at sige til fru Matias, at det da næsten kunne være dejligt, om der var nogen, der gad at aflytte os engang imellem, for så var der da i det mindste nogen, der lyttede til, hvad vi siger og foretager os her i Parlamentet! Man kan ikke samle Europa! For man kan ikke lave omelet af hårdkogte æg! Sådan sagde den tidligere franske præsident Charles de Gaulle engang. Charles de Gaulle tog fejl! Vi har jo gennem årene, gennem historien vist, at det faktisk kan lykkes at samle Europa. Og en af de vigtigste samlinger, vi har lavet, er jo netop det indre marked. Hvis jeg stillede mig op her i dag og sagde, at jeg er imod at skabe et indre marked for kartofler, for mælk, for traktorer, for køleskabe, så ville man jo tro, jeg var fuldstændig fra forstanden. På den baggrund er det jo fuldstændigt absurd, at vi i dag både fra sektoren og fra medlemslandene møder en meget kraftig modstand mod vores kommissærs forslag, som går ud på at skabe et indre marked for digitale ydelser og kommunikation. Jeg møder dagligt lobbyister for både regeringshold og for sektoren, der spørger, hvorfor det skal komme nu? Hvorfor så hurtigt? Hvorfor dette hastværk? Til det er der kun ét svar, og det er: Hvorfor er de forslag ikke kommet i går, i forgårs, for flere år siden? Og jeg vil gerne understrege, at det ikke er en kritik af vores kommissær. Jeg synes, det er pragtfuldt, at vi har en Kommission, som nu på dette område i hvert fald tør vise mod og mandshjerte og pege på noget, der kan bringe os fremad. Vi behøver ikke være enige i alle detaljerne, men det er vigtigt, at vi forstår, hvad målsætningen med det her er, og at vi samlet som Parlamentet forstår at bygge det op, som kommissæren er kommet med, for det er det, der skal tage os frem mod et indre marked, som burde være en selvfølge i Europa i dag.

  Adam Bielan (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Realizacja zasad swobodnego przepływu towarów, usług i kapitału w nowoczesnym świecie wymaga sprawnego funkcjonowania jednolitego rynku cyfrowego. Mechanizm ten jest kluczowy dla rozwoju gospodarki opartej na wiedzy, pobudzania aktywności obywateli oraz potęgowania inwestycji w kapitał ludzki. Niestety szereg przepisów wykonawczych wciąż pozostaje w fazie opracowywania, a ich późniejsze wdrażanie w państwach członkowskich przebiega powoli.

Z perspektywy konsumentów, za niezmiernie ważne uważam zagwarantowanie neutralności sieci. Systematyczny rozwój nowoczesnych technologii telekomunikacyjnych, w tym przyspieszenie wdrażania telefonii czwartej generacji, to dziś absolutny priorytet. Wyeliminowanie roamingu w oczywisty sposób zwiększy konkurencyjność usług komórkowych w Europie.

Liczę na konstruktywne inicjatywy Komisji, umożliwiające jak najszybszą finalizację budowy rynku cyfrowego, aby jego potencjał wspomagał progres gospodarczy Wspólnoty.

  Jolanta Emilia Hibner (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Witamy szanowną panią komisarz, naszą koleżankę Trautmann. To jest chyba jedno z pierwszych naszych sprawozdań, gdzie prawie nic nas nie dzieli. Wszyscy chcemy dobrego, jednolitego rynku łączności elektronicznej. Jest to o tyle ważne, że łączność elektroniczna wpisana jest w pakiecie konkurencyjności, przewidywalności, ale jednocześnie poddana kontroli ze strony Europejskiego Urzędu Regulacyjnego Rynku Telekomunikacyjnego. Co jest najważniejsze? Najważniejsze są usługi transeuropejskie, neutralność sieci. O to walczy nasza pani komisarz i to trzeba też docenić. Ważne są również paszporty telekomunikacyjne dla operatorów. My musimy spowodować, żeby operatorzy mieli absolutnie większy dostęp do sieci, żeby nie było blokad na naszych granicach. Ważna jest też wspólna platforma technologiczna i wymiana wszelkich informacji. Jeżeli my wymienimy między sobą najlepsze przykłady, to jest to sukces. Nie ważne, który kraj prześciga inne i w którym momencie . My powinniśmy zachowywać się wzorcowo. Jeżeli któryś kraj ma wzorcowy dostęp do telekomunikacji, te wzorce powinny być transportowane do wszystkich innych krajów. Ważne jest absolutnie zmniejszenie obciążeń administracyjnych, bo one są tak naprawdę blokadą dla rozwoju sieci telekomunikacyjnej i dostępu do rynku. Ważne jest też wprowadzenie zapisów prawnych. Wiadomo, że musimy jako Europejczycy nadążyć za rozwojem sieci telekomunikacyjnej, takiej, jaką mają w Stanach Zjednoczonych. Dla mnie takim najważniejszym hasłem jest: „Biegnij, Europo, bo inni są już na mecie”.

  Marita Ulvskog (S&D). - Herr talman! Jag vill ställa samma fråga som Jens Rohde gjorde: Varför kommer dessa förslag nu?

Detta var faktiskt frågor som vi diskuterade när kommissionär Kroes skulle väljas till kommissionär och vi parlamentariker ställde tuffa frågor om vilket program som hon tänkte jobba för. Nu i sista minuten av mandatperioden kommer förslagen. De är dessutom kombinerade med enormt stora förväntningar. Med hjälp av telekommarknaden ska vi bekämpa arbetslösheten, vi ska bekämpa krisen, vi ska åtgärda ungdomsarbetslösheten, och vi ska dessutom göra det väldigt bra för konsumenterna. Jag tycker att det känns som ett jätteberg som någon har skjutit framför sig tills vi befinner oss alldeles i slutet av en mandatperiod. Det kan mycket väl vara så att skulden inte ska läggas på kommissionär Kroes utan på andra delar av kommissionen.

Hur som helst måste vi ha rimliga förväntningar och en rimlig bild av var vi befinner oss. Det finns tre olika marknader inom EU: en nordlig telekommarknad, en – låt mig kalla det för mellaneuropeisk och en sydlig. Man måste erkänna att de finns där. Det måste nämligen vara styrande för de förslag som man sedan försöker genomdriva.

Man börjar inte från noll. Det kräver noggranna analyser, det kräver öppenhet, det kräver eftertanke – och det saknar jag i detta arbete. Viktigast är dock konsumentnyttan i slutändan. Med öppna ögon kommer jag att följa de förslag som förmodligen kommer att läggas fram.

  Francesco De Angelis (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho apprezzato molto il lavoro dell'onorevole Trautmann, davvero eccellente, così come il lavoro della Commissione sul tema dell'agenda digitale.

Nel merito, condivido le proposte. Il mercato unico è un obiettivo strategico per la competitività, la crescita e soprattutto l'occupazione. Ritengo tuttavia che dobbiamo accelerare il passo perché abbiamo bisogno di provvedimenti più coraggiosi per consolidare il mercato, tutelare soprattutto i consumatori e rendere quindi competitivo il tessuto economico, produttivo e industriale. Lo spettro radio e la neutralità della rete e il servizio universale sono questioni molto importanti per affermare i diritti fondamentali dei cittadini.

Infine, un'ultima questione sul roaming. Troppi tentennamenti; avremmo preferito la cancellazione di questa ingiusta tassa già nel 2015 e non rinviarla al 2016.

  Giles Chichester (ECR). - Mr President, actually I was going to enquire whether the Commissioner was going to give me a written answer to my questions, since she so elegantly has not answered them in the debate today. I look forward to hearing from her.

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Angelika Niebler (PPE). - Herr Präsident, verehrte Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zunächst ein Dankeschön an die Kollegin Trautmann für ihren Bericht, in dem sie alle wichtigen Fragen nochmals aufgreift, die auch mit Blick auf die Beratungen zum Telekom-Paket jetzt anstehen.

Ich möchte nur zwei Bemerkungen machen. Erstens: In den letzten zehn, zwanzig Jahren konnten wir feststellen, dass jeder technologische Fortschritt – egal in welchem Bereich, ob das die Automobilindustrie ist, ob das die chemische Industrie ist, ob das der Maschinenbau ist oder der Bereich Biotechnologie – mit IKT-Technologien zu tun hat. Das heißt, das was wir heute diskutieren und was Sie, Frau Kroes, an Vorschlägen vorgebracht haben, ist elementar dafür, dass Europa in der Welt auch wirklich eine wichtige wirtschaftspolitische Rolle spielt. Daher: Vielen Dank!

Ich möchte betonen, dass wir sicher auch im Parlament, zumindest was ich dazu beitragen kann, sehr engagiert in die Beratungen hineingehen werden. Die Kollegin Pilar del Castillo Vera hat bereits gesagt, wir werden zeitlich vielleicht ein Problem haben. Wir werden sicher nicht eine Einigung in erster Lesung hinkriegen. Aber bei den wichtigen Themen, bei den Fragen zur künftigen Frequenzpolitik, Thema Netzneutralität, das sind alles Sachen, da erwarten auch die Bürger von uns ein Signal, dass wir im Parlament hierzu eine Meinung haben. Und die sollten wir uns noch in dieser Legislatur bilden.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI). - Herr Präsident! Die neuen Medien stellen uns bekanntlich immer wieder vor neue Herausforderungen, schon allein die Vielzahl an Werbeformen auf Webseiten macht meines Erachtens eine genauere Durchleuchtung zum Schutz personenbezogener Daten notwendig.

Noch viel bedenklicher ist allerdings eine andere Form der Verfolgung: Wenn da etwa Google in Zusammenhang mit der NSA-Affäre ganz lapidar meint, kein gmail-Nutzer dürfe erwarten, dass der Inhalt seiner persönlichen E-Mails privat bleibt, ist dies höchst bedenklich. In der Vergangenheit hieß es ja noch, dass die E-Mails von gmail-Konten lediglich auf Spam und Viren gescannt werden und für die Schaltung personalisierter Daten verwendet werden.

Gerade im Zusammenhang mit dem Fortschreiten des E-Government muss meines Erachtens eindeutig klargestellt werden, dass beim E-Mail-Versenden ebenso wie beim Versenden von Briefen das Postgeheimnis gilt, also, dass kein Anbieter mitlesen darf. Ebenso haben die Kunden meines Erachtens ein Recht zu erfahren, welche Nutzerdaten an Sicherheitsbehörden weitergegeben werden dürfen.

(A „catch the eye” eljárás vége.)

  Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, thank you for this debate. By the way, this is the first time that I have had the experience in my nine years in office in Brussels/Strasbourg of being blamed for being too speedy. Mostly the reactions of our citizens are ‘my goodness, they believe in eternal life in Brussels/Strasbourg!’

Having said that, and being aware that there is much that we have in common, one issue I would like to underline is that I have been appointed for five years, provided that I follow the rules and behave properly. That means that I am paid to fulfil my responsibilities, and I can assure you that it is an appointment for five years and that I will be active until my last day in office. So to those who are saying that it is nearly time to think about what is next, I would say that I myself am not thinking of my future after this period. I am just concentrating on what has to be done – and I repeat – up to my last day in office.

I am glad that most of you share the view that bringing back economic growth is at stake. Europe needs competition and competitive high-speed broadband markets. Our proposal addresses new challenges in a fast-changing world. We are talking about the global scene: there are no more ring-fenced national states; there is no more ring-fenced Europe. This is a global stage. Therefore, it is absolutely essential to act quickly, as our competitors will not wait until we are ready.

If we want Europe to have the economy and the technology to thrive, we cannot wait around. Our proposal is pragmatic, but it is focused. It is focused on clear objectives: removing the most important barriers to the single market so that the market can evolve. We have acted fast to respond to a changing market and to changing technology so that the current framework continues to meet its objectives.

The impact assessment sets out – and I was listening to the remarks made about the impact assessment from both sides – our evidence and analysis on how we are achieving that. Yes, the speed with which we have had to act has created challenges for my people, for the Commission and for all those involved, and we are communicating intensively and keeping an eye on all those who are interested in this matter. I am counting my blessings that so many people and organisations are interested in what is at stake. But to those who complain about lack of consultation, I would say: come on! We have been speaking to stakeholders for years: market players, national regulators, BEREC, investors, Members of Parliament, you name it – on issues ranging from how to stimulate investment to net neutrality. I promise and guarantee that we are listening to those who are discussing these issues.

This does not mean that we are following 100 % what they are in favour of. We listened and we responded, but let us not use procedure as an excuse for inaction, and I am repeating myself here. That is exactly what we are so often blamed for: using procedures as an excuse. We cannot afford it, and I am always saying to those I am in discussions with that I want to be open and honest to those youngsters who do not have a job and who have no prospect of a job in the coming years. I do not want to tell them: ‘Well, we need to have more time for procedures; well, we need more discussions’, and so on. They are only interested in a real effort to do whatever would give them the prospect of a job. We cannot afford to do it differently.

I would like to reassure you that national regulatory agencies will remain fully responsible for fact-finding, analysing markets and identifying remedies nationally. Mr President, I can claim to have a bit of experience in national policies as well, and I do not buy it when people are not telling the truth. I want to argue, but not on fake arguments, and not on issues that are not correct, for then we will never come to a decent, final result.

So I would like to reassure all of you that that the national regulatory agencies will remain fully responsible for the issues I have mentioned. The Commission proposes a new power concerning the legal compatibility of remedies imposed on European operators before those remedies are implemented. But that power is subject to safeguards, guaranteeing legal predictability and certainty.

These proposals foster competition and consumer choice. They will end the problems with roaming charges in Europe once and for all. I am ready to fight for that. I think citizens deserve a decent bill, not one based on historical situations in Europe. We have a single market and we should use it, using a market-based approach that helps operators to internalise their costs, thereby protecting citizens from domestic price increases. In an open and competitive single market with fewer barriers and greater economies of scale, companies will only succeed by offering the best deals at the best prices. And that is positive – it is positive for every European. In the longer run, some consolidation might be a consequence – it is not up to us. I am not the one sitting in the business chair; I am not making their business models. That is up to them, because operators will see different opportunities, plans and strategies in the single market. They have to seize that opportunity. But make no mistake: competition law continues to apply, and if someone is there to defend competition law, it is me.

European and national competition authorities continue to keep a close eye on this, and our proposal will bring many benefits to European citizens and businesses. Let me mention just one, and then I shall talk about jobs. The internet creates five jobs for every two jobs lost. In fact, a single market in telecoms will boost GDP by up to EUR 110 billion. That is exactly what I was talking about. If we do not speed up, what is the answer? If we are aware that this could be the real result of our actions, what is our answer to those who are looking forward? Is it that we are failing in our promise to do our utmost to restore the economy and create a climate in which creating jobs is at stake?

A growth boost would more than offset the negative impacts. Remember that the digital sector is crying out for talented workers, but it relies on fast broadband. I know that we share many common objectives for a digital single market, with fast broadband underpinning a more competitive Europe. We need to work together, and I am grateful to those who have mentioned that. I am grateful for the clear statement that Ms del Castillo Vera made, that we have to get together and fight and have a discussion. I am a democrat, and I am looking forward to that discussion and no mistake. We need to work together to achieve this and move one step closer.

Quite a number of you touched on the universal service rules. We are working on the next review of the scope of universal service, which will take place at the end of next year. The work foreseen will include assessing the economic and societal impact of various scenarios of universal service obligations and the potential inclusion of broadband in its scope.

This is what is at stake, and the honourable Member Matias mentioned it: to get every European digital. This was an issue when I first took responsibility for this portfolio. If we are to ensure that every European goes digital and is aware of the positive advantages of the internet, then we need to create trust and security, otherwise people will not be convinced that that is the way they should deal with it.

I am also talking about an ageing population. I am not only talking about the youngsters: they are well aware of what is at stake for them in the development of the internet. We badly need the ageing population to be involved in this positive part of our society. It can give them a lot of perspectives. Security, trust and confidence are at stake.

Just a last word – and of course I will gladly answer Mr Chichester in a written text. I am certain that that will stay longer in his office than my spoken text. It is quite clear, as mentioned by a couple of you, that it is unrealistic to think that we can adopt this proposal by the end of the parliamentary term. I am aware that your term and my term, so to speak, are not completely parallel. But we have to be ambitious; we have to think positively. We can and should adopt this proposal quickly. I learnt from my mother that if you really want something, you fight for it. I can assure you that I will do so.

(Applause)

  Catherine Trautmann, rapporteure. − Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, je voudrais vous rassurer. Nous sommes un Parlement responsable et comme mes collègues l'ont exprimé ce matin, nous mesurons parfaitement notre responsabilité pour légiférer sur un texte qui mette du lien, de la cohérence, un texte qui donne confiance aux investisseurs pour créer de l'emploi au bénéfice des consommateurs. Notre cahier des charges, nous le connaissons. Vous nous avez fait une proposition. Nous saurons dégager ce qui est prioritaire et ce qui devra nous mobiliser pour travailler utilement pour nos concitoyens.

Je me réjouis aussi que le Conseil planche aujourd'hui sur une stratégie globale sur le numérique. En effet, j'attendais dans la proposition que vous nous avez soumise une stratégie industrielle, des orientations sur la normalisation et, bien sûr, un certain nombre de pistes sur la fiscalité. J'ai écouté M. Barroso hier et j'ai beaucoup apprécié que soit mis en place un groupe d'experts qui travaillera précisément sur l'aspect de la fiscalité.

Au vu de tout ce qui est mis sur la table, l'ensemble du Parlement, d'ici la fin de son mandat, autour des collègues rapporteurs, travaillera à dégager ce qui sera utile pour permettre au prochain Parlement d'enchaîner. C'est bien l'intention que nous avons. Nous n'avons pas l'intention de travailler sans parvenir un résultat. Nous savons pertinemment que nous serons aussi jugés par les électeurs, qui attendent des réponses sur ces questions. Nous avons travaillé sur la protection des données, sur le cloud, sur les aspects des droits des consommateurs, sur les contrats, sur la transparence et ce Parlement peut se targuer de résultats significatifs qui montrent aujourd'hui qu'il est aussi un exemple dans le monde.

Mais nous savons que nous devons accélérer pour suivre l'évolution technologique et répondre aux prochains défis. Soyez rassurée, Madame la Commissaire, nous travaillerons, mais nous travaillerons librement, intensément, et nous saurons présenter notre bilan à l'ensemble de nos concitoyens.

Pour terminer, Monsieur le Président, encore un mot parce que j'avais un point d'interrogation. Vous avez dit, Madame la Commissaire, que vous n'aimez pas – je vous cite – les gens qui ne disent pas la vérité. Dans ce Parlement, je crois que tout le monde s'est exprimé sincèrement. Le débat était utile et je voudrais vous remercier, Madame la Commissaire, d'y avoir vous-même contribué.

  Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, I would just like to mention that when I said some people were not telling the truth, I was not referring to anyone at all in this House.

  President. − The debate is closed.

The vote will take place shortly.

Written statements (Rule 149)

  Marino Baldini (S&D), napisan. - Imajući u vidu posljednje izmjene u zakonskom okviru koje se tiču cijena telekomunikacijskih usluga u drugim državama, izrazio bih zadovoljstvo postignutim snižavanjem cijena usluga roaminga. Ovim cjenovnim promjenama usluga je postala ekonomski prihvatljivija i dostupnija krajnjem korisniku. No, istovremeno bih naglasio kako je ostalo dosta prostora za napredak i kvalitetnije uređenje zakonskog okvira u pogledu elektroničkih komunikacijskih usluga i to posebice u dijelu koji se odnosi na razvoj jedinstvenog tržišta u području telekomunikacija. Također bih kao osobito važno istaknuo primjenu načela mrežne neutralnosti. Ovo načelo, kojim se operaterima nameće obveza da korisnicima ne smiju blokirati određene aplikacije, nažalost se ne primjenjuje. Zbog važnosti ovog načela, kroz koje se ostvaruje nediskriminatorna politika pružanja usluga krajnjem korisniku, od iznimne je važnosti da se zakonskoj regulaciji istoga pristupi detaljno, ali svakako u razumnom vremenskom roku kako bi relevantni propisi odgovorili na zahtjeve razvoja dinamičnog tržišta. Ovakav koncept za dugoročan cilj bi imao poticaj razvoja digitalnog društva te proširenje poslovanja kompanija izvan matičnih država članica. Smisao postojanja EU-a u svom izvornom i temeljnom smislu potiče rušenje granica koje su nepotrebne, ekonomski prihvatljive samo malobrojnim i štetne za većinu građana. Na ovaj način učinit će se dodatni korak u povećanju prava potrošača.

  András Gyürk (PPE), írásban – Catherine Trautmann képviselő asszony elektronikus hírközlésről szóló jelentése nagy jelentőséggel bír, hiszen közös érdekünk, hogy a társadalom mind nagyobb hányada élvezhesse az internet nyújtotta előnyöket.

A jelentésben felsorolt problémákkal egyetértek, de engedjék meg, hogy kiemeljek néhány különösen fontos pontot. Elsőként a fogyasztók szempontjaira szeretném felhívni a figyelmet. A fogyasztók érdeke az alacsony ár és a szolgáltatóválasztás lehetősége, ezért olyan piaci struktúrát kell kialakítani, amely a lehető legnagyobb versenyt biztosítja a szolgáltatók között.

Másodszor, a beruházásokra is gondolnunk kell, hiszen a verseny előfeltétele az infrastruktúrához való hozzáférés, illetve az átlátható, egységes és beruházásokat ösztönző keretfeltételek.

Harmadszor, az egységes piaci struktúra kialakítása során nem szabad figyelmen kívül hagynunk a széles körű, folyamatos és intenzív konzultáció fontosságát. Egy valóban egységes piac elérése csak olyan szabályozási keretek között működik, amely hűen tükrözi minden gazdasági és kormányzati szereplő, illetve a többi érintett véleményét.

Mindezek fényében üdvözlöm a Bizottság „Behálózott Kontinens” elnevezésű rendeletjavaslatát, amely a fent felsorolt problémákra keres megoldást. Ez a javaslat azonban olyan összetett kérdéseket érint, amelyek kezelésére csak egy alapos helyzetértékelésre épülő csomag alkalmas. Félő azonban, hogy a csomag feszített ütemezése miatt elmaradt ez a részletes helyzetértékelés, és várhatóan a jelenlegi parlamenti ciklus is kevés lesz a téma részletes kitárgyalásához.

  Danuta Jazłowiecka (PPE), na piśmie. – Niewątpliwie w interesie całej Unii jest stworzenie jednolitego rynku internetowego. Wciąż istniejące przeszkody i bariery uniemożliwiają pełne wykorzystanie jego potencjału. Zgadzam się z Komisją, że rynek składający się z 28 odrębnych krajowych rynków telekomunikacyjnych, na którym w dodatku działa ponad dwustu operatorów, nie może być przyjazny ani dla przedsiębiorców, ani konsumentów. Dlatego rozumiem intencje przyświecające Komisji przy tworzeniu wniosku ustawodawczego. Wydaje mi się jednak, że problem jest na tyle poważny, iż wymaga pogłębionej refleksji i dokładnej analizy. Nie możemy bowiem dopuścić do sytuacji, że przyjęte rozwiązania prawne jeszcze bardziej utrudnią funkcjonowanie na rynku elektronicznym. Możliwe korzyści są duże, ale potencjał szkód przy niewłaściwym uregulowaniu tej kwestii również jest ogromny. Dlatego też dziwić może, że Komisja zdecydowała się na tak szybkie tempo prac. Słuszne wydają się więc wątpliwości związane z brakiem wystarczających konsultacji społecznych nad tym wnioskiem. Z drugiej jednak strony sektor internetowy jest tak dynamiczny, że każdy miesiąc zwłoki może osłabić naszą konkurencyjność na globalnym rynku. Dlatego też Parlament Europejski musi dołożyć wszelkich starań, aby prace nad tym rozporządzeniem przebiegały sprawnie i doprowadziły do przyjęcia rozwiązań łączących w sobie ułatwienia dla przedsiębiorców z wysoką ochroną konsumentów.

  Alajos Mészáros (PPE) , irasban. – Az egységes digitális piacban rejlő lehetőségek kulcsfontosságú szerepet játszanak egy versenyképesebb és dinamikusabb gazdaság megteremtéséhez. Egyenlő és akadálytalan hozzáférést kell biztosítanunk a nagy sebességű, szélessávú internethálózatokhoz valamennyi polgárunk számára. Infrastruktúránk kiépítésével 2016-ig globálisan 16 milliárd eurós bevételt és 4,4 millió újonnan létrehozott munkahelyet teremthetünk. Szem előtt kell tartani a globalizációból és az új technológiák használatából eredő kihívásokat, hiszen a nagy mennyiségű adatok és a tudás képezi az Unió jövőbeli gazdaságának hajtóerejét. A felhőalapú számítástechnika minimális indulási költségeket és kevés infrastruktúrát igényel, így az informatikai ágazat és a kkv-k számára lehetőséget biztosíthat arra, hogy az új digitális szolgáltatások és adatközpontok terén vezető pozíciót szerezzenek. Az e-közbeszerzéshez hasonló innovatív technológiai megoldások elfogadása révén ösztönözni lehet az új, jó minőségű e-kormányzati szolgáltatásokat is, ezáltal segítve a fennakadásmentes információ- és szolgáltatásnyújtást. Mivel a világgazdaság egyre inkább internetalapúvá válik, fel kell ismerni, hogy az intelligens, fenntartható és inkluzív növekedés egyik forrását az információs és kommunikációs technológiák jelentik. Ezért hívnám fel a Bizottság és a tagállamok figyelmét, hogy kötelezzék el magukat az egységes digitális piac kialakításához mint átfogó politikai prioritás felé.

  Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), na piśmie. – Przejrzystość i jasne zasady stanowienia prawa to jedne z podstawowych cech demokracji. Natomiast jedną z zasad stanowienia prawa europejskiego jest udział Parlamentu Europejskiego w procedurze ustawodawczej. Dlatego dużym niepokojem – o czym wspomina w swoim sprawozdaniu poseł Catherine Trautmann – napawa zamiar przedstawienia na wiosnę przyszłego roku przez komisarz ds. agendy cyfrowej końcowego pakietu dotyczącego utworzenia jednolitego wewnętrznego rynku łączności elektronicznej. Podzielam pogląd, że w tak ważnej i złożonej sprawie Parlament Europejski nie powinien być zaskakiwany nowymi projektami i nie powinien podejmować decyzji pod presją czasu. Proszę, zatem o odpowiedź, dlaczego Komisja, zamiast dokonać całościowego przeglądu ram regulacyjnych dotyczących łączności elektronicznej, zamierza w przyszłym roku przedstawić Parlamentowi Europejskiemu propozycje nowych rozwiązań w tym zakresie, co ze względu na koniec kadencji uniemożliwi przeprowadzenie dogłębnej i merytorycznej debaty w tej bardzo ważnej sprawie?

  Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE), na piśmie. – Dzisiejsza rzeczywistość opiera się na technologiach informacyjnych. W moim przekonaniu wszelkie inicjatywy i działania, które mają ułatwić i usprawnić przesył danych, są tak samo, a może nawet bardziej, istotne niż inwestycje infrastrukturalne. Cieszy mnie, że Komisja Przemysłu, Badań Naukowych i Energii postanowiła dokonać przeglądu wdrażania ram regulacyjnych dotyczących łączności elektronicznej, ponieważ pokazuje w ten sposób wszelkie niedociągnięcia, które powinniśmy jak najszybciej poprawić.

W sprawozdaniu wiele uwagi poświęca się dostępowi do szerokopasmowego internetu na terenie całej Unii Europejskiej. Warto przyjrzeć się regionom. Przegląd danych EUROSTAT-u unaocznia bardzo istotny problem rozpiętości w dostępie do internetu pomiędzy regionami Unii. Dla przykładu, dostęp do szerokopasmowego internetu w regionie Sztokholmu wynosi 91%, natomiast w rumuńskim regionie północno-wschodnim to zaledwie 17%. Regularnie z internetu korzysta od 94 do zaledwie 33 procent obywateli państw członkowskich. Również w Polsce widoczny jest podział na Wschód i Zachód. Rozpiętości sięgają 10%, biorąc pod uwagę oba wskaźniki. Sprawozdanie wspomina o zmniejszaniu przepaści w dostępie do najnowszych technologii informatycznych pomiędzy regionami. Rzeczywiście naszym priorytetem powinno być, by żadna z grup mieszkańców nie pozostawała wykluczona cyfrowo. Należy stale wspierać państwa w dążeniach do budowy społeczeństwa informacyjnego.