6.3.2014   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 67/137

1.1

As it has pointed out in several opinions, the EESC firmly believes that broadband access for everyone is key to the development of the European economy and from now on will be an essential element in the creation of new jobs.

1.2

Moreover, the EESC believes that building the single digital market, which is one of the EU's priority objectives, requires interconnection and interoperability between national networks. This is also vital for opening up many regions which have suffered economically and culturally.

1.3

Yet, on 8 February 2013, under the new multiannual financial framework (MFF), the Council slashed the digital Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) budget to EUR 1 billion. The amended proposal takes into account the latest positions in the Council and in the relevant European Parliament committee.

1.4

The EESC therefore laments the fact that the Commission's revised proposal envisages deep cuts in the relevant budget - originally set at EUR 9,2 billion and now pruned to EUR 1 billion - and expresses its regret that the Commission has been forced to make far-reaching changes to projects of common interest for the development of broadband networks and digital service infrastructures. In the EESC's view, the inevitable freeze in many projects resulting from this decision risks depriving the EU of the technological advance it had secured in many strategic sectors.

1.5

The Committee stresses the huge difficulties for the Commission in effectively and fairly allocating the funds provided for in the regulation, given the drastic reduction in the initial envelope.

1.6

The EESC is nevertheless pleased that the principle of technological neutrality, essential for a genuinely open internet, is being reaffirmed. The EESC points out that resources must be used for open, accessible network solutions which are non-discriminatory and affordable for the general public and for companies.

1.7

The EESC reiterates its call for European, national and regional maps to be drawn up which identify coverage gaps and facilitate the creation of new public and private initiatives. The Commission recognises that no Member State or investor is prepared to fund cross-border services.

1.8

It is also important to be open to cooperation with third countries and international organisations in order to enhance interoperability between respective telecommunications networks.

1.9

The EESC believes that the proliferation of alternative operators, although it has encouraged innovation and brought down prices for consumers, has also considerably narrowed the margins of established public and private operators, as well as restricting and even stifling the investment capacity of some of these operators. It feels that a new European policy for regulating the networks - a virtuous circle of competition - is needed and that this will have to lead to close, coordinated involvement of the major European operators so that, as soon as Europe comes out of the crisis, it can make up the ground lost in developing broadband and ultra-fast broadband, and eliminate gaps in coverage.

1.10

The EESC regrets the fact that on such an important subject the Council, Parliament and Commission have not managed to reach a unanimous position. Given the size of the new envelope, the EESC feels that universal access to the internet, together with the development of broadband services and pan-European services platforms, remain priorities.

1.11

The EESC notes with consternation that the Commission has, at the Council's request, removed the reference to both the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions in Article 8 of the revised text. The EESC expresses the firm wish that the report in question be forwarded to it.

1.12

Lastly, the EESC reiterates that it will from now on be absolutely essential to include internet access in the universal service.

2.1

The EU Digital Agenda seeks to deploy cross-border public online services in order to facilitate the mobility of businesses and individuals. Building the single market therefore requires the interoperability of these emerging digital services.

2.2

The EU has set itself ambitious targets for broadband roll-out and take-up by 2020. On 29 June 2011, the communication entitled "A Budget for Europe 2020" on the 2014-2020 multiannual financial framework proposed that a Connecting Europe Facility be set up and that EUR 9,2 billion be earmarked for digital networks and services.

2.3

However, on 8 February 2013, in the new multiannual financial framework, the Council cut the CEF budget back to EUR 1 billion. On this new basis, the amended proposal takes into account as far as possible the latest positions in the Council and in the relevant European Parliament committee. It aims to focus the CEF measures on a smaller number of digital service infrastructures, based on a stringent set of prioritisation criteria, and a limited contribution to broadband via financial instruments, with a view to leveraging private investment as well as investment from public sources other than the CEF.

2.4

Despite its limited financial contribution for broadband, the proposal lays down a framework enabling wider contributions from business and institutional players such as the European Investment Bank.

2.5

The main objective of the regulation is to streamline digital transmission and eliminate bottlenecks. The guidelines are accompanied by a list of Projects of Common Interest for the deployment of digital service infrastructures and broadband networks. These projects will help boost the competitiveness of the European economy, including that of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), promote the interconnection and interoperability of national, regional and local networks, as well as access to such networks, and support the development of a Digital Single Market.

2.6

In the face of a difficult situation on the markets, the economic value of investing in broadband networks and the delivery of services of general interest appears to be limited, even if the single digital market holds considerable potential for growth.

2.7

Direct subsidies are planned for digital service infrastructures, to sort out bottlenecks linked to service deployment within interoperable frameworks. In most cases, these platforms are fully funded by the EU, as there are no natural owners of interoperable European service infrastructures.

2.8

It is now clear that no Member State or investor is prepared to fund cross-border services. The added value of EU action is thus high.

2.9

Every year, depending on the funding available and priorities identified, digital service infrastructures will nevertheless be deployed. Given the EU budgetary context, public support will come from sources other than the CEF, in particular from national sources and from the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF). The CEF will only be able to finance a limited number of broadband projects by itself, but it will facilitate the efficient allocation of ESIF in particular, by using funds earmarked for operational programmes. Such contributions will be ring-fenced for use in the Member State concerned. In matters pertaining to broadband, this proposal is limited to laying down mechanisms for allocating structural fund resources.

2.10

The principle of technological neutrality is being applied.

3.1

Two services have not been retained: "Trans-European high-speed backbone connections for public administrations" and "Information and communication technology solutions for intelligent energy networks and for the provision of Smart Energy Services".

3.2

The development of new digital service infrastructures to facilitate moves from one European country to another, the "European platform for the interconnection of employment and social security services", and "Online administrative cooperation platforms" have all been dropped.

3.3

The European Parliament's Industry, Research and Energy Committee has added further digital service infrastructures for the "Deployment of infrastructures in public transports [sic] allowing the use of secure and interoperable mobile proximity services", the "Online Dispute Resolution Platform", the "European Platform for Access to Educational Resources", and "Cross border interoperable electronic invoicing services".

3.4

Nevertheless, the EP has introduced very ambitious target transmission speeds ("1Gbps where possible and above").

3.5

The goal of the Digital Agenda for Europe, which is to put a broadband (high-speed) digital infrastructure in place which uses both fixed and wireless technologies, will require measures to remove "digital bottlenecks". In view of the deep cuts in a budget originally set at EUR 9,2 billion and now pruned to EUR 1 billion, the Commission has been forced to make far-reaching changes to projects of common interest for the development of broadband networks and digital service infrastructures.

3.6

As it has stated in several opinions, the EESC firmly believes that universal access to broadband, as well as being a key factor in the development of modern economies, has also become vital for creating jobs, ensuring greater cohesion and well-being, and securing the e-inclusion of people and entire economically and culturally disadvantaged areas.

3.7

The objectives and priorities of the projects of common interest developed to this end have been defined in response to a fundamental requirement: optimal use of financial resources and achievement of precise goals without spreading funds too thinly.

3.8

The EESC welcomes the reiteration of the principle of technological neutrality, which is essential for the internet to be genuinely open.

3.9

It points out that resources must be used for open, accessible network solutions which are non-discriminatory and affordable for the general public and for companies. At the same time, the Committee stresses the huge difficulties for the Commission in fairly allocating the funds provided for in the regulation, given the drastically reduced budget.

3.10

It is now clear that no Member State or investor is prepared to fund cross-border services. The added value of EU action is thus high. The EESC reiterates its call for European, national and regional maps to be drawn up identifying gaps in coverage and facilitating the creation of new public and private initiatives. It is also important to be open to cooperation with third countries and international organisations, in order to strengthen interoperability between respective telecommunications networks.

3.11

The EESC believes that the proliferation of alternative operators, although it has boosted competition and brought down prices for consumers, has also considerably narrowed the margins of established public and private operators, as well as limiting their investment capacity. It is therefore important to discuss a new European policy for regulating networks that would allow close, coordinated involvement of all European players in this sector so that, as soon as Europe comes out of the crisis, it can make up the ground lost in developing broadband and ultra-fast broadband delivery.

4.1

The EESC laments the extent of disagreement between the Council, Parliament and the Commission on a subject that is of such importance.

4.2

There was a great deal at stake when the telecoms envelope was still set at EUR 9 billion for broadband and service platforms. Given the size of the new envelope, it seems justifiable to earmark it for activities which will provide the "building blocks" for projects that are currently on ice for budgetary reasons.

4.3

Developing the single digital market requires interconnection and interoperability between national networks. Against the new background of a shrinking budget, the Commission must set stricter criteria for selecting projects for funding, and monitor and assess them on an ongoing basis.

4.4

The EESC would point out that these projects may help SMEs to access the digital economy and create new stable jobs in the long term. The EESC asks that a regular report be published on the use of this funding.

4.5

Lastly, the EESC reiterates that from now on it will be absolutely essential to include internet access in the universal service.

4.6

Out of consideration for interinstitutional relations, it is with astonishment, verging on consternation, that the EESC notes that the Commission has removed the reference to both the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions in Article 8 of the revised text. In the course of discussions and at the EESC, the Commission representative explained this by stating that it had been done at the Council's request.

Perhaps it is the expression "forwarded" that causes a problem. Nevertheless, the EESC underlines its firm wish to receive the report in question.